Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "The Pastor : a monthly journal for priests"

See other formats




'Op/o magis sen/ire compunctioncm quam scire efus definitionem. " a Kempia 

A Monthly Journal for Priests. 



VOL. VI. 18878. 




P. O. BOX, 3627. 


APR 25 1952 
APR 25 

"Opio magis senlire compundionem qtiam scire ejus definitionem. " a Kempis. 


NOVEMBER, 1887. 

No. i. 


Confession is the best safeguard of the young. Synods and 
councils make the confession of children a frequent subject of 
legislation, instruction, direction, suggestion. Among other things 
they insist on the duty of pastors preparing children betimes 
for their first confession, and seeing to it that the children 
thence-forward approach the sacred tribunal at regular intervals. 

The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore (n. 442) enjoins 
on pastors of souls to get the children of the parish who have 
not made their first communion together, at least four times a 
year, for instruction, say, . during the Ember weeks, and get 
those who have reached the age of seven to go to confession. 
This age of seven years, however, is not to be taken mathe- 
matically. The legislation proceeds de communiter contingentibus. 
"There can be no doubt that the law regarding confession was 
made and promulgated by Christ himself. But at what age 
and at what periods that law is to be complied with, is deter- 
mined by the canon of Lateran Omnis uiriusque. From that 
canon we learn that, before attaining that age in which comes 
the use of reason, no one is bound to confess. But the age 
at which the use of reason is acquired cannot be fixed at any 
certain number of years, but is to be determined in general. "- 
Catechismus Cone. Trid. Parte ii. c. v. n. 44. And the Cate- 
chism adds: "ab eo tempore confessionem puero indictam esse 
quum inter bonum et malum discernendi vim habet, in ejus- 
que mentem dolus cadere potest." This age of discretion may 
be reached by some children before, by others not till well 
after the age of seven. As a rule seven is set down, and as 
a rule it is safer for pastors to be beforehand than behind. 
And this is insinuated in the same Council (Second Plen. of 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1887. All rights reserved. 


Bait.) n. 292: "Qua potissimum aerate parvuli huic tribunal! 
primum se sistere teneantur, nunquim fuit ab Ecclesia definitum. 
Alii enim ocius, alii serius usum rationis acquirunt. Rem igi- 
tur pastorum prudentiae et zelo committi'mus, qui facilius pos. 
sunt ex singulorum indole, moribus, et ingenio judicare, utrum 
sint adhuc sacramenti hujus capaces, necne." In a crowd of 
little ones brought to confession, it may happen that it is only 
in the confesssional the priest can discover the odd ones among 
them, who are not only capable of receiving the sacrament, but 
stand in veritable need of its purifying grace. To guide the 
confessor, seven years is set down when children may be supposed 
to be fit subjects for confession; but, as in the council of 
Cologne, (1860), the discretion of the pastor is sometimes re- 
stricted. In that council it is decreed that first confession shall 
not be deferred beyond the age of nine: " Parochi pueros ad 
primam confessionem diligentissime praeparent. Ne autem haec 
prima confessio ultra nonum annum differatur, stride prohi- 
bemus. Ac deinceps singulis trimestribus ad confessionem facien- 
dam adducendi sunt." Tit. II. c. 23. It is a crime for a 
pastor to neglect gathering the children for confession until they 
reach the age of ten or eleven, when they are usually placed 
in the class preparing for first communion. Long before this 
age they should have been carefu'ly prepared for their first con- 
fession and grown habituated to the sacred tribunal. 

An unpleasant often and difficult, but a very essential, duty 
of all pastors is properly to prepare these little ones for their 
first confession. On the preparation, however, made for this 
confession, will often depend the perfection or imperfection of all 
the confessions made in after life; and, according to the Cate- 
chism of the Council of Trent, whatever there is of piety and 
virtue in Catholic people must be mainly ascribed to the 
influence of confession. 

To prepare children properly for confession it will certainly 
not suffice to get them to commit to memory the questions and 
answers of the catechism regarding the sacrament of penance. 
They should, of course, be made to learn by heart, if possible, 
the most of the chapter on this sacrament, and should also 
have by heart the answers on the chief truths of religion those 
things that must be known de prcecepto. But when they know 
the chapter for instance on penance, by heart, the catechist's task 
is not done. He must try to make them comprehend the 


meaning of the words they use, and teach them how to apply 
in practice the lesson of the catechism : thus, he must teach 
them practically how to examine their conscience bv passing 
in review with them the ten commandments, and pointing out 
in the simplest language at his command how children may 
transgress the first, second, third, etc. He must carefully 
explain the distinction between a sin of thought, a desire of 
revenge, for example, and a sin of act. (The tables of sins 
given in most of our prayer books are generally worthless or 
worse for children, and the catechist who merely refers his class 
to such tables is negligent of his duty.) 

In like manner, contrition and firm purpose must be explained 
by comparisons or examples and the like. The motives also for 
contrition must be dwelt on: how holy, and good, and merciful 
God has been to them ; how the Son of God, our dear Saviour, 
came from heaven for the love of their souls, how much he suf- 
fered for them from Bethlehem to Mount Calvary, on the cross, 
(and how in all these sufferings he thought of them, of each of 
them in particular), to free their souls from sin, to purchase beau- 
tiful heaven for them; to offend such a good God and Saviour, 
how ungrateful, how wicked ! How hateful and detestable is 
sin! etc. 

It must be deeply impressed on their young hearts, that 
their confession would not be good, if they should merely read 
an act of contrition from their prayer book or say it by heart, 
if they did not really and sincerely hate and detest their sins, 
and sincerely mean to keep from sin, at least from all grievous 
sin, hereafter, etc. They should repeatedly be reminded that 
they must do all this examine their conscience, make such an 
act of contrition and resolution of amendment, before they 
enter the confessional. (For, practically, this is necessary both 
for children and grown people.) Concerning confession itself 
they must be encouraged to be very sincere, by assuring them 
that the confessor takes the place of our kind Saviour, and will 
treat them kindly; will help them if they need it; will never 
think ill of them for being so sincere and so well disposed: 
that he never will make known to any one the slightest fault 
from their confession; that he must rather die than mention 
the least venial sin or imperfection told him in confession. 
(With children false shame is to be particularly guarded against.) 
If they do not know how to confess any particular sin proper- 


ly, they should say: I committed some sin and do not know 
how to confess it; or even if they were tempted in confession 
by false shame, they should say: I committed a sin and feel 
ashamed to confess it ; then the confessor would help them. 
They could go to confession to whatsoever father confessor they 
pleased. (The pastor, if at all possible, should have some as- 
sistance in hearing the confessions of children during Ember- 
week or thereabouts. The second Plenary Council considers 
this liberty of conscience of such importance as to state with 
emphasis in the short decree on first confession: Monemus la- 
men, lam panulis, etiam prima vice confessuris, quam aduitis, licere 
quemlibet ab episcopo probatum confcssarium adire. (No. 292.) 

Each child should know by heart the formulas to be said 
immediately before and after confession, for inst. the confiteor, 
or better, as given in the new catechism: "Bless me, father. I 
confess to Almighty God and to you father, that I have sinned." 
Then: "It is three months since my last confession, etc." 
Whilst the children are actually in church to make their con- 
fession, they should be constantly under the surveillance of a 
teacher or some other reliable person. They should not be 
senc to church in such a number as to oblige them to wait there 
for half an hour or more. At all events, they should know how 
to make use of their prayer book or beads during that time, 
and also after confession. 

Some priests may smile at these ' ' small details." But they 
may rest assured that by thus preparing the little ones for their 
confession four times a year, and taking care of them, they will 
do more real good than by a dozen eloquent sermons or 

brilliant lectures. 


N. N. of New York enquired of the S. Congregation of Rites 
.whether it is lawful to use prayer books, having the ordinarium 
miss& in Latin and English. 

Resp.: Libros eorumque versiones in lingua vernacula, de 
quibus agitur, a canonicis praescriptionibus et Apostolicis decretis, 
episcoporum auctoritati omnino reservari ; ideoque licitum non 
esse fidelibus horum uti editionibus, nisi istae expressam praese- 
ferant episcoporum adprobationem. Die 4 August! 1877. (5703.) 




There is so much loose talk indulged in and so much 
fantastic philosophy, as it were, in the air, it is not easy for 
men, even fairly learned, to preserve their minds free from 
these surrounding influences, and keep themselves from assent- 
ing to, or at least dallying with, propositions and theories really 
heretical. While sound reasoning would of itself be sufficient 
to steer us safely through this misty philosophy and lay bare 
its naked assumptions and illogical conclusions, we may as 
well recognize the fact that not every mind is capable, either 
by native, powers or special training, to dissect and analyze every 
specious theory put forward. And this applies equally to clergy 
and laity. But, "fides ex auditu." Not on our powers of rea- 
soning hangs our faith. We are taught the dogmas of religion 
and we reverently accept the teaching. If some articles of the 
teaching do not commend themselves to the limited reasoning 
powers we possess, to the limited grasp of our intellect what 
then? Shall truth be subjective? Shall that be true because -so 
it appears to Tom, and this, because it appears true to Dick, 
and a wholly different third view, true, because so it seems to 
Harry ? But truth is objective, and a thing is so, or not so, 
entirely independent of what Tom, Dick, or Harry thinks. The 
very humble as indeed the very wise and truly philosophical 
thing for us to do, is to hearken amid all the din for the au- 
thoritative teaching of the Church, and, having caught that voice, rest. 

There are two documents that will overshadow all others 
in the history of the Catholic Church of the nineteenth century, 
the Apostolic Letter Quanta Cura with accompanying Syllabus 
and the Constitutio dogmatica De Ecclesia Christi of the Vatican 
Council. The one is the complement of the other. In the 
whirl of thought and the noisy babbling of the present day, a 
serious perusal of Quanta Cura and the Syllabus might help to 
steady us and prevent us from turning philosophers all in a 
freak. If we cannot understand all the propositions of the 
Syllabus let us only reverently say: "Lead, kindly Light." 


Everybody knows that the teaching of philosophy is per se 
no part of the mission of the Church. Yet the bishops of the 
Church have been ever intently watchful of the system or sys- 
tems of philosophy taught within the limits of their jurisdiction ; 
and when these systems impinged on the depositum fidei of 
which they are the divinely constituted guardians, and were 
seen to be irreconcilable either with defined dogma or Apos- 
tolic tradition, they never hesitated to condemn the philosoph- 
ical system or refer the matter to the infallible See. According 
to the needs of the day and the importance of the subject, 
the Pope, after mature consideration and consultation and prayer, 
would pronounce the formal condemnation of the system or 
proposition, not precisely as philosophical, but as heretical or as 
tending to heresy. 

Previous to the Vatican Council, an intolerable state of things 
had come into existence. These utterances of the Holy See 
were entirely disregarded, and that, even by men who professed and 
openly taught the theoretical infallibility of the successor of St. 
Peter. To say nothing of those who denied the infallibility, others 
would evade the condemnation and go on teaching the heresy on 
one ground or another: either the Pope was not speaking ex 
cathedra, however solemn the pronunciamento ;, or it was a ques- 
tion merely of philosophy, and, as such, outside the deposit of faith; 
or the Pope was misinformed, and none of the condemnations 
touched the particular theory. Under these assumptions the 
entire teaching authority of the Church, of course, went for 
nought. Pope or bishop could, if they chose, assume the 
role of disputant, but no more. 

Among other reasons assigned by the late Bishop of Pader- 
born for publishing the Concilii Valicani Documentorum Colledio 
was this, that it may be evident to the world that the definition 
of the infallibility was due to the insistance cf many bishops. 
"An, ut hoc unurn commemoremus, quisnam nescit, ipsam 
infallibilis magisterii Romani Pontificis definitionem, pro qua 
tanquam pretiosissimo hujus concilii fructu Christiani omnes, qui 
hoc nomine digni sunt, Benignissimo Domino ex animo semper 
gratias agent, ex pluiimorum Concilii Patrum postulatione ortum 
ducere?" Few of the bishops who assembled at the Council had 
ever doubted the infallibility of the Pope when speaking ex cathedra ; 
but not all were alive to the fact that the time had come, when 
a formal definition of the dogma was almost an absolute nee- 


essity. But many were, and these insisted and persisted. With 
these it was : Let the definition be made, or all the teaching 
authority of the episcopate of the Church is undermined. And 
to this conclusion the great body of the Fathers came. Accord- 
ingly we read in the Constiiutio dogmalica de Ecclesia Chrisli, ch. iii. : 

"Si quis dixerit, Romanum Pontificem habere tantum officium 
inspectionis vel directionis, non autem plenam et supremam 
potestatem jurisdictions in universam Ecclesiam, non solum in 
rebus quae ad fidem et mores, sed etiam in us, quce ad disci- 
plinam el regimen Ecclesice per Mum orbcm diffuses pertinent 
aut eum habere tantum potiores partes, non vero totam plenitu- 
dinem hujus supremae potestatis ; aut hanc ejus potestatem non 
esse ordinariam et immediatam, sive in omnes ac singulas 
ecclesias, sive in omnes et singulos pastores et fideles ; anathema sit. " 
And in Chapter IV. of the same Constitution : 

" At vero cum hac ipsa aetate, qua salutifera Apostolici muneris 
efficacia vel maxime requiritur, non pauci inveniantur, qui illius 
auctoritati obtrectant : necessarium omnino esse censemus, piae- 
rogativam, quam unigenitus Dei Filius cum summo pastorali 
officio conjungere dignatus est, solemniter asserere. 

Itaque Nos traditioni a fidei Christianas exordio perceptae 
fideliter inhaerendo, ad Dei Salvatoris nostri gloriam, religionis 
Catholicse exaltationem et christianorum populorum salutem, 
sacro approbante Concilio, docemus et divinitus revelatum dogma 
esse definimus: Romanum Pontificem, cum ex cathedra loquitur, 
id est, cum, omnium Christianorum Pastoris et Doctoris munere 
fungens, pro suprema sua Apostolica auctoritate doctrinam de 
fide vel moribus ab universa Ecclesia tenendam definit, per 
assistentiam divinam, ipsi in beato Petro promissam, ea infalli- 
bilitate pollere, qua divinus Redemptor Ecclesiam suam in 
definienda doctrina de fide vel moribus instructam esse voluit ; 
ideoque ejusmodi Romani Pontificis definitiones ex sese, non 
autem ex consensu Ecclesiae, irreformabiles esse. 

Si quis autem huic Nostrae definitioni contradicere, quod 
Deus avertat, praesumpserit ; anathema sit." 

When the Placet of the Fathers had been given to this 
chapter IV., Pius IX., in an address to the Council, thus beautifully 
expressed the scope and the intent of the decree : " Summa ista 
Romani Pontificis auctoritas, Venerabiles Fratres, non opprimit 
sed adjuvat, non destruit sed aedificat, et saepissime confirmat in 


dignitate, unit in caritate, et Fratrurn, scilicet Episcoporum, juia 
firmat atque tuetur. " 

All theologians know that these definitions did not create an 
infallibility that was not, but mere'y declared that such infalli- 
bility had always existed. The Vatican Council then solemnly 
affirmed that the ex-cathedra teaching of Gregory as well as 
Pius was the expression of the divine tradition of the Church. 
We may not clearly comprehend all the truths taught in the 
Syllabus. That matters little. So far as the meaning ot the 
propositions is clear and unmistakable, it is our duty as Catholics 
neither to hold, nor think, nor teach, nor talk anything to the 


i. With what care and pastoral vigilance the Roman Pontiffs, our 
predecessors, always earnestly endeavored to feed all the flock with 
the words of faith, to imbue them with wholesome doctrine, and 
keep them from poisoned pastures is well known to all men, and 
especially to you, Venerable Brethren. In this they were but 
fulfilling the task and performing the duty imposed on them 
in the person of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, by 
Christ himself, of feeding his lambs and his sheep. And these 
predecessors of ours, the champions and defenders of the holy 
Catholic religion, of justice and of truth, in their solicitude for 
the salvation of souls, deemed nothing of more importance 




Venerabiks Fratres, Salu'.em et Apostolicam Benedictionem. 

I. Quanta Ctira ac pastorali vigilantia Romani Pontifices Prrcdecessores 
Nostri exsequentes demandatum sibi ab ipso Christo Domino in persona 
Beatissimi Petri Apostolorum Principis officium munusque pascendi agnos 
et oves, nunquam intermiserint universum Dominicum gregem sedulo 
enutrire verbis fidei, ac salutari doctrina imbuere, eumque ab venenatis 
pascuis arcere, omnibus qnidem ac Vobis praesertim compertum, exploratum- 
que est, Venerabiles Fratres. Et sane iidem Decessores Nostri augustae 
catholicoe religionis, veritatis ac justitiae assertores et vindices, de animarum 


than to drag to light and condemn by timely Letters and 
Constitutions those errors and heresies which militate against our 
divine faith, the doctrine of the Catholic Church, sound morals, 
and man's eternal salvation. These errors frequently gave ri.-e to 
great commotions and shamefully defiled both the Christian and 
the civil commonwealth. Hence our predecessors stood out with 
apostolic firmness against the wily machinations of those bad 
men who, frothing forth their own confusion like a turbid sea, 
and promising liberty while they are themselves the slaves of cor- 
ruption, endeavored, by the dissemination of false principles and 
pernicious publications, to upheave the very foundations of the Cath- 
olic religion and civil society, to do away with all virtue and 
justice, to deprave the minds and the hearts of all, and to 
withdraw the unsuspecting, especially the youth, from the path 
of rectitude, to corrupt their morals, lead them into the snares 
of error, and ultimately wrest them from the bosom of the 
Catholic Church. 

2. As you all remember, Venerable Brethren, we were hardly 
seated in the chair of Peter (to which, by no merit certainly of 
ours, but in God's secret providence, we have been raised) when, 
in the performance of our Apostolic duty, and following in the 
footsteps of our illustrious predecessors, we raised our voice, and 
by many published encyclicals and allocutions in consistory, and 
other Apostolic letters we condemned the chief errors of this 

salute maxima solliciti, nihil potius unquam habuere, quam sapientissimis 
suis Litteris et Constituiiombus retegere et damnare omues haereses et er- 
rores, qui Divinse Fidei nostrse, catholicse Ecclesise doctrinse, morum honestati, 
ac sempiternse hominum saluti adversi, graves frequenter excitarunt tempestates, 
et christianam civilemque rempublicam miserandum in modum funesta'unt. 
Quocirca iidem Decessores Nostri Apostolica fortitudine continenter obstiterunt 
nefariis iniquorum hominum molitionibus, qui despumantes tamquam fluctus 
feri maris confusiones suas, ac libertatem promittentes, cum servi sint cor- 
ruptionis, fallacibus suis opinionibus et perniciosissimis scriplis catholicae 
religionis civilisque societatis fundamenta convellere, omnemque virtutem ac 
justitiam de medio tollere, omniumque animos mentesque depravare, et in- 
cautos, imperitamque prsesertim juventutem a recta morum disciplina 
avertere, eamque miserabiliter corrumpere, in erroris laqueos inducere, ac 
tandem ab Ecclesiae catholicse sinu avellere conati sunt. 

II. Jam vero, uti Vobis, Venerabiles Fratres, apprime notum est, nos vix 
dum arcano divinje providenliae consilio nullis certe Nostris mentis ad hanc 
Petri Cathedra m evecti fuimus. cum videremus summo animi Nostri dolore 
horribilem sane procellam tot pravis opinionibus excitatam, et gravissima ac 
nunquam satis lugenda dami-a, quae in christianum populum ex tot erroribus 
redundant, pro Apostolici Nostri ministerii officio illustria Praedecessorum 


sad age of ours ; we directed thereto your exemplary episcopal 
vigilance, and again and again admonished and exhorted all 
the children of the Catholic Church, who are so dear to us, to 
shun and detest all contact with the fearful pest. For with 
extreme sadness of heart we perceived the abominable confusion 
begotten of false principles and the very great evils, that can 
never be too much deplored, which, as a result of so many 
errors, befell Christian men and women. We would refer particularly, 
to our first encyclical, dated Nov. 9, 1846, and to the two allo- 
cutions dated respectively Dec. 9, 1854, and June 9, 1862. In 
these we condemned the horrid results of the principles that 
have sway in this age, to the great detriment of souls and of 
civil society itself principles which are directly opposed, not only 
to the Catholic Church, to her saving doctrine, and ancient pre- 
rogatives, but even to the eternal law of God written on the 
hearts of all, as well as to sound reason : and from these 
principles flow nearly all the other errors of the times. 

3. Although we failed not to prescribe and denounce the 
chief errors of the day before now, yet the cause of the Catholic 
Church, the salvation of the souls divinely entrusted to our care, 
and the good of human society itself evidently demand that we 
should again arouse your pastoral solicitude to tread down some 
other .vile maxims which have their root in those false princi- 

Nostroium ve.-tig a sectantes Nostrum extulimus vocem, ac pluribus in vul- 
gus editis encyclicis Epistolis, et Allocutionibus in consistorio habitis, aliisque 
Apostolicis Litteris prrecipuos tristissimos nostras setatis errores damnavimus, 
eximiamque vesirnm episcopalem vigilantiam excitavimus, et universes catho- 
licae Ecclesiae Nobis carissimos filios etiam atque etiam monuimus et exhortati 
sumus, ut tarn dirae contagia pestis omnino horrerent et devitarent. Ac 
proesertim Nostra prima Encyclica Epistola die 9 Novembris anno 1846, 
Vobis scripta, binisque Allocutionibus, quarum altera die 9 Decembris anno 
I '"54, altera vero 9 Junii anno 1862 in Consistorio a Nobis habita fuit 
monstrosa opinionum portenta damnavimus, quae hac potissimum aetate cum 
maximo animarum damno, et civilis ipsius societatis detrimento dominantur, 
quceque non solum catholicae Ecclesiae. ejusque salutari doctrinae ac veneran- 
dis juribus, verum etiam sempiternae, naturali legi a Deo in omnium cordibus 
insculptae, rectceque ratione maxime adversantur, et ex quibus alii prope 
omnes originem habent errores. 

III. Etsi autem haud omiserimus potisimos hujusmodi errores srepe pro- 
scribere et reprobare, tamen catholicae Ecclesiae causa animarumque salus 
Nobis divinitus commissa, atque ipsius humanae societatis bonum omnino 
postulant, ut iterum pastoralem vestram sollicitudinem excitemus ad alias 
pravas profligandas opiniones, quae ex eisdem erroribus, veluti ex fontibus 
erumpunt. Quae falsae ac perversae opiniones eo magis detestandae sunt, quod 


pies spoken of. And these vile maxims are all the more de- 
testable in that their main tendency is to do away with that 
wholesome restraint which the Catholic Church, by the ordinance 
and mandate of her divine author, should be free to put upon, 
not only individuals, but nations and nations' rulers, and to 
put an end to the good understanding and concord between the 
priesthood and civil government, which has always been so 
beneficial both to religion and society. 

4- For, as you are well aware, Venerable Brethren, there are 
those in this age who, making application to civil society of the 
impious and absurd principle of Naturalism, as they term it, 
dare to teach that the best interests of the common- wealth and 
political progress absolutely demand that human society shall be 
moulded and directed without any regard to religion, no more 
than if such a thing did not exist, or at least that there be 
no difference recognized between the true religion and false ones. 
And, contrary to the teaching of the Sacred Scriptures, the Church 
and the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that the best 
condition of society is that in which the civil power refuses to 
recognize any obligation on its part to restrain or punish the 
violators of the Catholic religion, unless in so far as may be required 
by the public peace. 

5. Acting on this false idea of civic government, they fear not 
to further that false opinion, so ruinous to the Church and 

eo potissimum spectant, ut impediatur et amoveatur salutaris ilia vis, quam 
catholica Ecclesia ex divini sui Auctoris institutione et mandate libere exer- 
cere debet usque ad consummationem sceculi, non minus erga singulos homines, 
quam erga nationes, populos, summosque eorum Principes, utque de medio 
tollatur mutua ilia inter Sacerdotium et Imperium consiliorum societas et 
concordia, quae rei cum sacrae turn civili fausta semper extitit ac salutaris. ' 

IV. Et enim probe noscitis, Venerabiles Fratres, hoc tempore non paucos 
reperiri, qui civili consortio impium absurdumque ttaturalismi, uti vocant, 
principium applicantes, audent docere, " optimam societatis publics rationem 
civilemque progressum omnino requirere, ut humana societas constituatur et 
gubernetur, nullo habito ad religionem respectu. ac si ea non existeret, vel 
saltern nullo facto veram inter falsasque religiones discrimine." Atque con- 
tra sacrarum Litterarum, Ecclesire, sanctorumque Patrum doctrinam, asserere 
non dubitant "optimam esse conclitionem societatis, in qua Imperio non ag- 
noscitur ofncinm coercendi sancitis poenis violatores catholicse religionis, nisi 
quatenus pax publica postulet." 

V. Ex qua omnino falsa socialis regiminis idea haud timent erroneam illam 
fovere opinionem, cntholicx Ecclesiae, animarumque saluti maxime exitialem 

1 Gregor. XVI., Epist. encycl. Mirari, 15 Aug. 1832. 


ruinous to souls, and which was described as madness by our 
predecessor Gregory XVI., namely, that liberty of conscience and 
worship is the strict right of every individual and that it ought 
to be proclaimed and maintained by law in every well constituted 
society : and further, that every citizen has a full right openly 
and publicly, without let or hindrance from any authority, civil 
or ecclesiastical, to declare and manifest his views, whatever they 
be, whether by tongue, or pen, or by any other means. While 
advocating doctrines such as these, they forget that they are 
preaching the liberty of perdition, and that, if it were in all things 
free to human ingenuity to argue, never would there be wanting 
men who would designedly blink the truth and rely on their 
disputatious logic : but with what scrupulous care faith and 
Christian wisdom should shun ihis pernicious vanity may be 
easily known from the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ himself. 
6. When religion is banished from civil society, and the 
teaching and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the proper 
notion of justice and of human right is obscured and lost, and 
material force takes the place of true justice and lawful right. 
Hence comes it that some men, neglecting and setting entirely 
aside the most evident principles of sound reason, argue that the 
will of the people manifested by public opinion, as they call it, 

a rec. mem. Gregorio XVI. Praedecessore Nostro dehramentiim appellatam, 1 
nimirum " libeitatem conscientise et cultuum esse proprium cujuscumque 
hominis jus, quod lege proclamari et asseri debet in omni recte consiituta 
societate ; et jus civibus inesse ad omnimodam libertatem nulla vel ecclesi- 
astica vel civili auctoritate coarctandam, quo suos conceptus quoscumque 
sive voce, sive typis, sive alia ratione palam publiceque manifestare. ac de- 
clarare valeant." Dum vero id temere affirmant, baud cogitant et considerant, 
quod libertatem perditionis 2 praeflicant, et quod " si humanis persuasionibus 
semper disceptare sit liberum, nunquam deesse poterunt, qui veritaii audeant 
resultare, et de humanae sapientiae loquacitate confidere, cum hanc nocen- 
tissimam vanitatem quantum debeat fides et sapientia Christiana vitare, ex 
ipsa domini nostri Je-u Christi institutione cognoscat." 3 

VI. Et quoniam. ubi a civili societate fuit amota religio, ac repudiata 
divince revelationis doctrina et auctoritas, vel ipsa germana justitiae humanique 
juris notio tenebris obscuratur et amittitur, atque in verse jus'itise legitimique 
juris locum materialis substituitur vis. inde linuet cur nonnulli, certissimis 
sance rationis principiis penitus neglectis posthabitisque, audeant conclamare, 
" voluntatem populi, publica, quam dicunt, opinione vel alia ratione 
manifestatam, constituere supremam legem ab omni divino humanoque jure 

1 Eadem encycl. Mirari. 

2 S. Augustin. Epist. 105 al. 166. 

3 S. Leo Epist. 164 al. 133, . 2. edit. Ballerin. 


or in any other way, constitutes the supreme law, restricted 
by no other law human or divine ; and that in political affairs, 
consummated facts, by the mere fact of being consummated, 
acquire the force of right. But who does not see and plainly 
perceive that human society, cut loose from the ties of religion 
and true justice, can have no other purpose than to procure 
and accumulate riches, and can follow no law in its actions but 
that of serving the. unbridled desires for pleasure and luxuries. 

7. As a natural result these men denounce with bitter hate the 
religious Orders, notwithstanding their members have deserved so 
well of the religious and literary world, and cry with a bluster 
that the Orders have no business being in existence at all. Of 
course, they applaud the calumnies of heretics. They, know what 
they are at. For, as our predecessor of happy memory, Pius 
VI., truly taught: "The abolition of the Regulars would be a 
blow to the public profession of the evangelical counsels, would 
be a censure on that method of life commended by the Church 
as conformable to Apostolic teaching, and a slur on the illustrious 
Founders, whom we venerate on cur altars, and who founded 
these Orders only under the inspiration of Almighty God." 
These same men impiously assert that both private citizens and 
the Church should be denied the right of openly granting alms 
in the cause of Christian charity, and that the law prohibiting 
servile work on certain days should be abrogated on the false 

solutam; et in ordine politico facta consummata, eo ipso quod consummata 
sunt, vim juris habere." Verum ecquis non videt, planeque sentit, hominum 
societateai, religionis ac verse justitiae vinculis solutam, nullam aliud 
profecto propositum habere posse, nisi scopum comparandi, cumulandique 
opes, nullamque aliam in suis actionibus legem sequi, nisi indomitam animi 
cupiditatem, inserviendi propriis voluptatibus et commodis? 

VII. Eapropter hujusmodi homines acerbo sane odio insectantur Religiosas 
Familias, quamvis de re Christiana, civili ac litteraria summopere meritas, et 
blaterant, easdem nullam habere legitimam existendi rationem ; atque ita 
haereticorum commends plaudunt. Nam, ut sapientissime rec. mem. Pius 
VI. Decessor Noster docebat, " Regularium abolitio laedit statum publicae 
professionis consiliorum evangelicorum, laedit vivendi rationem in Ecclesia 
commendatam tamquam Apostolicae doctrinae consentaneam, Isedit ipsos 
insignes fundatores, quos super altaribus veneramur, qui nonnisi a Deo 
inspirati eas constituerunt societates." :{ Atque etiam impie pronunciant, 
auferendam esse civibus et Ecclesiae facultatem "qua eleemosynas christianae 
caritatis causa palam erogare valeant," ac de medio tollendam legem "qua 
certis aliquibus diebus opera servilia propter Dei cultum prohibentur, " 

3 Epist. ad Card. De la Rochefoucault 10 Martii 1791. 


pretense that both are contrary to the principles of political 

8. And these men, not content with excising religion from 
society, would fain pluck it from the family hearth. 
Holding as they do and professing the abominable doctrines 
of Socialism and Communism, they claim that domestic society, or 
the family, derives all its right to existence from the civil 
government only ; and that consequently all the rights of parents 
over their children, especially as regards the manner of their 
bringing up and training, are derived from, and depend exclu- 
sively on, the civil law. 

9. By these impious maxims and machinations, these lying 
sophists aim chiefly at eliminating entirely from the training 
and education of youth the teaching and the salutary influence 
of the Catholic Church, and imbuing and corrupting their 
tender and impressionable minds with pernicious maxims and 
vices. It is known that those who ever sought the ruin of 
Church or State, who plotted revolution and desired to obliterate 
all rights human and divine, invariably directed all their efforts, 
iheir wicked wiles and work, towards deceiving and depraving 
unsuspecting youth, and in the corruption of the young, as we 
intimated already, reposed all their hope of success. And hence, 
notwithstanding the many splendid monuments to which history 
points as witnesses of the great things done both by the 
secular and the regular clergy for the religious, the political, and 

fallacissime praetexentes, commemoratam facultatem et legem optimse publicae 
ceconomije principiis obsistere. 

VIII. Neque contenti amovere religionem a publica societate, volunt 
religionem ipsam a privatis etiam arcere familiis. Etenim funeslissimum 
Communismi et Socialismi docentes ac profitentes errorem asserunt, "socie- 
tatem domesticam seu familiam totam sure existentise rationem a jure dumtaxat 
civili mutuari ; proindeque ex lege tantum civili dimanare ac pendere jura 
omnia parentum in filios, cum primis vero jus institutionis, educationisque 

IX. Quibus impiis opinionibus, machinationibusque in id praecipue intendunt 
fallacissimi isti homines, ut salutifera catholic* Ecclesiae doctrina ac vis a 
juventutis institutione et educatione prorsus eliminetur, ac teneri dexibilesque 
juvenum animi perniciosis quibusque erroribus, vitiisque misere inficiantur ac 
depraventur. Siquidem omnes, qui rem turn sacram, turn publicam pertur- 
bare, ac rectum societatis ordinem evertere, et jura omnia divina et humana 
delere sunt conati, omnia nefaria sua consilia, studia, et operam in 
improvidam prresertim juventutem decipiendam ac depravandam, ut supra 
innuimus, semper contulerunt, omnemque spem in ipsius juventutis corrupted 
collocarunt. Quocirca nunquam cessant utrumque clerum, ex quo, veluti 


the literary world, these men never cease to harass, by every 
dishonorable means, the clergy, both secular and regular, and to 
clamor that the clergy, as hostile to the true and profitable 
progress of science and civilization, should be entirely deprived of 
any hand in the education and training of the young. 

10. Others, furbishing up the old calumnies of the reformers 
so often condemned, have the astonishing impudence to assert 
that the supreme authority conferred on the Church and upon 
this Apostolic See by Christ our Lord is subject to the civil 
power, and they deny the right of the Church or the Holy 
See to interfere at all where temporal matters are concerned. 
Nor do they blush to affirm that the laws of the Church are 
not binding in conscience unless when promulgated by the civil 
authority ; that the acts and decrees of the Roman Pontiffs 
regarding the Church and religion need the sanction and 
approbation, or at least the assent, of the secular power ; that 
the Apostolic constitutions in which are anathematized secret 
societies, whether oath-bound or not, as well as their aiders and 
abettors, have no force in countries where such societies are 
tolerated by the civil government ; that the excommunication 
launched by the Council of Trent and the Roman Pontiffs 
against all who invade and usurp the rights and possessions of 
the Church, is based on a confounding of the spiritual with the 

certissima historise monumenta splendide testantur, tot magna in christianam, 
civilem, et litterariam rempublicam commoda redundaruut, quibuscumque 
infandis modis divexare, et edicere, ipsum Clerum, "utpote vero, utilique 
scientise et civilitatis progressui inimicum, ab omni juventutis instituenda? 
educandaeque cuia et officio esse amovendum." 

X. At vero alii instaurantes prava ac toties damnata novatorum commenta, 
insigni impudentia audent, Ecclesias et hujus Apostolicae Sedis supremam 
auctoritatem a Christo Domino ei tributam civilis auctoritatis arbitrio subjicere, 
et omnia ejusdem Ecclesise et Sedis jura denegare circa ea quse ad 
exteriorem ordinem pertinent. Namque ipsos minime pudet affirmare, 
" Ecclesiae leges non obligare in conscientia, nisi cum promulgantur a civili 
potestate ; acta et decreta Romanorum Pontifi um ad religionem et EcclesUm 
spectantia indigere sanctione et approbatione, vel, minimum, assensu potestatis 
civilis ; const itutiones Apostolicas, 1 quihus damnantur clandestine societates, 
sive in eis exigatur, sive non exigatur juramentum de secreto servando, 
earumque asseclae et fautores ar.athemate mulctantur, nullam habere vim in 
illis orbis regiombus, ubi ejusmodi ag<:regationes tolerantur a civili gubernio ; 
excommunicationem a Conrilio Tridentino et Romanis Pontificibus latam in 

1 dementis XII. "/ eminenfi." Benedicti XIV. " Ptovitlas Romanorum" 
Pii VII. " Ecclesiam." Leonis XII. '-Quo graviora" 


civil and political regime, and has for its purpose only the 
acquisition of temporal things ; that the Church should make 
no law which would affect the consciences of the faithful in 
regard to the use of temporal things ; that the Church has no 
right to have recourse to temporal penalties to punish the 
violators of ecclesiastical law ; that it is conformable to the 
principles of theology and public law for the government to 
assert and maintain its proprietorship of the possessions held by 
churches, religious communities, and all pious foundations. 

11. Nor do these men hesitate to revive and profess openly 
and publicly the old maxim and principle of the heretics, from 
which spring so many errors and perverse conclusions : namely, 
that the ecclesiastical authority is not by divine right separate 
from, and independent of, the civil power; and that no Midi 
separation and independence is possible without supposing the 
ecclesiastical authority to encroach on and usurp the essential 
rights of the civil power. 

1 2. Nor can we leave unnoticed the audacity of some who 
contend that, so long as faith and morals be not in question, 
they can withhold assent and obedience without sin or detri- 
ment to their Catholicity from judgments and decrees of the 
Apostolic See, even though the declared object of these judg- 
ments and decrees is tiie general good of the Church, her rights, 
and her discipline. How contrary this teaching is to the Cath- 

eos qui jura possessionesque Ecclesise invadunt, et usurpant, niti confu- 
sione ordinis spiritualis, ordinisque civilis ac politici, ad mundanum dum- 
taxat bonum prosequendum; Ecclesiam nihil debere decernere, quod ob- 
stringere possit fidelium conscientias in ordine ad usum rerum temporalium; 
Eccksise jus non competere viola'ores legum suarum poenis temporalibus 
coercendi ; conforme esse sacrae theologize, jurisque publici principiis, bono- 
rum proprietatem, quae ab ecclesiis, a Familiis religiosis, aliisque locis 
piis possidentur, civili gubernio asserere et vindicate." 

XI. Neque erubescunt palam publiceque profiler! haereticorum eflatum et 
principium, ex quo tot perversre orinntur sententiae, atque errores. Dic- 
titant enim, " Ecclesiasticam potestatem non esse jure divino distinctam et 
independentem a potestate civili, neque ejusmodi distinctionem et indepen- 
dentiam servari posse, quin ab Ecclesia invadantur et usurpentur essentialia 
jura potestatis civilis." 

XII. Atque silentio prseterire non possumus eorum audaciam, qui sanam 
'non sustinentes doctrinam contendunt, "illis Apostolicse Sedis judiciis et 
decretis, quorum objectum ad bonum generale Ecclesise, ejusdem jura ac 
disciplinam spectare declaratur, dummodo fidei morumque dogmata non at- 
tingat, posse assensum et obedientiam detrectari absque peccato, et absque 
ulla catholicse professionis jactura." Quod quidem quantopere adversetur 


olic dogma of the plenitude of power divinely granted by Christ 
Our Lord to the Roman Pontiff, to feed, guide, and govern 
the whole Church, every one can readily and clearly see and 

13. Owing to the determined obstinacy with which these vile 
tenets are pushed, we have deemed it well once again to raise 
our Apostolic voice in warning. To do so is incumbeut on us, 
in virtue of the Apostolic office we hold, for the sake of our 
most holy religion, for the sake of sound doctrine, for the sake 
of the salvation of souls divinely entrusted to our care, and 
finally for the good of human society itself. And therefore all 
and each of the false maxims and tenets enumerated one by 
one in this letter, we reprobate by our Apostolic authority, pro- 
scribe and condemn, and we wish and command that they be 
held as absolutely reprobated, proscribed, and condemned by all 
the children of the Catholic Church. 

14. Besides all this, you are fully aware, Ven. Brethren, that 
in these days the haters of all truth and justice, and the 
bitter enemies of our religion are disseminating other impious 
doctrines by means of pestiferous books and pamphlets, and by 
means of periodicals scattered over the whole earth that deceive 
the people, and lie with malice. Nor is it unknown to you, 
that in this, our day, men are to be found who, actuated and 
moved by the spirit of Satan, have gone so far as to deny our 
Lord Jesus Christ, and who shudder not with criminal audacity 

catholico doomati plense potestaiis Romano Pontifici ab ipso Christo Dor 
mino divinitus collatae, universalem pascenid, regendi, et gubernandi Ecclesiam 
nemo est qui non clare aperteque videat et intelli^at. 

XIII. In tanta igitur depravatarum opinionum perversitate, Nos Apostolici 
Nostri officii probe memores, ac de sanctissima nostra religione, de sana 
doctrina et animarum salute Nobis divinitus cooimissa, ac de ipsius humanse 
societatis bono maxime solliciti, Apostolicam Nostram vocem iterum extollere 
existimavimus. Itaque omnes et singulas pravas opiniones ac doctrinas 
singillatim hisce Litteris commemoratas auctoritate Nostra Apostolica repro- 
bamus, proscribimus, atque damnamus, casque ab omnibus catholicce Ecclesise 
filiis, veluti reprubatas, proscriptas, atque damnatas omnino haberi volumus 
et mandamus. 

XIV. Ac prater ei, optime scitis, Venerabiles Fratres, hisce temporibus 
omnis veritatis justitiasque osores, et acerrimos nostrae religionis hostes, per 
pestiferos lihros, libellos et ephemerides toto terrarum orbe dispersas populis 
illudentes, ac malitiose mentientes, alias impias quasque disseminare doctrinas. 
Neque ignoratis, hac etiam nostra setate nonnullos reperiri, qui satanae 
spiritu permoti et incitati eo impietatis devenerunt, ut Dominatorem Dominum 


to question His divinity. Here, however, we cannot but laud 
you to the highest, Ven. Brethren, in that with all zeal you 
failed not to lift up your episcopal voices against this monstrous 

15. Therefore we again address you most lovingly in this 
Apostolic Letter you who are called to share in our solicitude 
and are to us the source of the greatest joy, comfort, and 
consolation in our bitter trials, owing to your admirable spirit 
of religion and piety, and owing to that love, fidelity, and 
reverence with which you, one and all, adhere to us and to 
this Apostolic See, the \\hile you are strenuously and faithfully 
striving to fulfil the heavy duties of your episcopacy. For we 
expect it of your exemplary pastoral zeal, that, taking up the 
sword of the spirit which is the Word of God, and finding 
strength in the grace of Oar Lord Jesus Christ, you will, with 
renewed efforts, still daily more and more carefully see to it 
that the faithful committed to your care "keep from the noxious 
herbs which Christ does not cultivate, because they are not of 
his Father's planting." And to your people you will never cease 
to inculcate that the one source of all true happiness for man 
is found in our august religion, its doctrine, and its practices, 
and that happy is the people whose God is the Lord of Hosts. 
Teach them that nations endure when their foundations rest on 

nostium Jesum Christum negare, ejusque Divinitatem sceleratar procacitate 
oppugnare non paveant. Hie vero haud possumus, quin maximis meritisque 
laudibus Vos efferamus, Venerabiles Fratres, qui episcopalem vestram vocem 
contra tantam impietatem omni zelo attollere minime omisistis. 

XV. Itaque hisce Nostris Litteris Vos iterum amantissime alloquimur 
qui in scllicitudinis Nostrse partem vocati, summo Nobis inter maximas 
Nostras acerbitates solatio, Isetitise, et consolationi estis propter egregiam, 
qua prsestatis religionem, pietatem, ac propter miium ilium amoreni, fidem, 
et observantiam, qua Nobis et huic Apostolicae Sedi concordissimis animis 
obstricti, gravissimum episcopale vestrum ministerium strenue ac sedulo 
implere contenditis. Etenim ab eximio vestro pastorali zelo exspectamus, 
ut assumentes gladium spiritus. quod est verbum Dei, et confortati in 
gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi, velitis ingeminatis studiis quotidie magis 
prospicere, ut fideles curse vestrae concrediti "abstineant ab herbis noxiis, 
quas Jesus Christus non colit, "quia non sunt plantatio Patris." l Atque 
eisdem fidelibus inculcare nunquam desinite, omnem veram felicita'cm in 
homines ex augusta nostra religione, ejusque doctrina et exercitio redundare, 
ac beatum esse populum, cujus Dominus Deus ejus. 2 Docete, ''catholicae 

1 S. Ignatius M. ad Philadelph. 3. 

2 Psalm cxliii. 


Catholic faith, and that there is nothing so deadly, nothing so 
prone to fall, nothing so exposed on all sides to danger, as 
this, to persuade ourselves that it is enough to have received free 
will, and that we have nothing more to ask of God ; that is, that, 
forgetful of the author of our being, we should assert our freedom 
by abjuring his power over us. Teach also that the sovereign 
power was instituted on earth not merely for temporal purposes, 
but mostly for the protection of the Church ; and that nothing 
can be either more profitable or glorious to states, princes, 
kings, as our predecessor S. Felix Zenoni wrote the emperor, 
than to allow the Catholic Church to use its own laws, and not 
allow any one to interfere with her liberty. For it is certain that 
it will be for their own good, when the cause is the cause of 
God, to submit the royal will to the priests of Christ, not to 
arrogate supremacy. 

But if ever, etc. (Here follows the jubihe concession.} 
Given at Rome, this eighth day of December, 1864. 

Fidei fundamento regna subsistere, ' et nihil tarn mortiferum, tarn prseceps 
ad casum, tarn expositum ad omnia pericula, si hoc solum nobis putantes 
posse sufficere, quod liberum arbitrium, cum nasceremur, accepimus, ultra 
jam a Domino nihil quseramus, id est auctoris nostri obLti, ejus potentiam, 
ut nos ostendamus liberos, abjuremus." ' 2 Atque etiam ne omittatis docere 
" regiam potestatem non ad solum mundi regimen, sed maxima ad Ecclesise 
presidium' esse collatam, 3 et nihil esse quod civitatum principibus et 
regibus majori fructui gloriseque esse possit, quam si, ut sapientissimus fortis- 
simusque alter Predecessor Noster, S. Felix Zenoni, Imperatori perscribebat, 

Ecclesiam catholicam sinant uti legibus suis, nee libertati ejus 

quemquam permittant obsistere . . . Certum est enim, hoc rebus suis esse 
salutare, ut, cum de causis Dei agatur, juxta ipsius constitutum regiam 
voluntatem Sacerdotibus Christ! studeant subdere, non prseferre." * 

Datum Romse apud S. Petrum die viii. Decembris anno 1864, Pontificatus 
Nostri anno decimo nono, Pius IX. 

The Syllabus of condemned propositions should here follow. 
But space forbids. It will be given in next number. Both the 
Encyclical Quanta Cura and the condemned propositions should 
be kept fresh in the mind of every clergyman. They are as 
lighthouses set upon sunken rocks to warn mariners off. 

1 S. Cselest. epist. 22 ad Synod. Ephes., apud Const, pag. 1200. 

2 S. Innocent. I. epist. 29 ad Episc. Cone. Carthag., apud Const, p. 891. 

3 S. Leo Epist. 156 al. 125. 

4 Pius VII. Epist. encycl. Din satis, 15 Mali 1800. 



The idea of power conveys the idea of relative sovereignty or 
independence of the person or thing over which the power is 
exercised. The Church being a power in virtue of the grant 
made by our Lord, (Matt, xviii. 18). has the right to legislate 
on the sacramental relations of Matrimony, and also on its civil 
or social relations as far as they are connected with sacramental 
or moral effects. 

Before we enter into details on this matter, certain outlines 
must be drawn. There is a distinction between the prohibent 
and diriment statutes on the subject of Matrimony. The former 
affects the lawfulness of the action, the other the validity. The 
Church occupies herself chiefly with the diriment impediments. 

As far as Christians are concerned, the Church, and the 
Church only, can decide on the diriment impediments. 

As to the marriages of infidels, and in some cases of the 
faithful, and the rights of the Church in prohibiting even them, 
we shall see farther on. 

Be it remembered, that, in dealing with this question and 
the following, we do not intend to discuss the civil conse- 
quences in matters of an impediment diriment here ; the Church 
is sole judge, if such exists. The pretended union cannot be 
made valid by all the civil laws enacted since Adam first drew 
breath, nor, should there be more, until Gabriel shall sound his 

The Church declares, in no uncertain tones, in the 24th 
session, canon i., of the Council of Trent, and proves it by 
reference, that Matrimony is a Sacrament ; that she has equal 
power with the Old Law, as to the effects of consanguinity and 
affinity (canon 3) ; that she could, and consequently can, enact 
prohibent and diriment impediments, and in doing so has not 
erred. Moreover, in canon 12 she declares that matrimonial 
matters belong exclusively to her legislation, and interference 
therein is unwarrantable on the part of earthly potentates who, 
acting on the principles of the i6th century heretics, considered 
Matrimony as a civil contract and subject to civil jurisdiction 

Mark Antony de Idinius, chiefly distinguished for swinging 
around the circle, wrote a work which was published subsequent 


to the Tridentine Council, in which he admits the authority of 
the Church, but denies its source. His theory is that she de- 
rived her right from the concessions of earthly rulers. 

Launoy, a Doctor of the Sorbonne, who seemingly aimed to 
walk as closely as possible to the heretical pit without falling 
in, admits that Matrimony is a Sacrament, while he declares that 
in essence it is but a civil contract ; in consequence the effects 
are amenable to civil authority. He explains the third and 
fouith canons of the Council, by declaring that they are not 
dogmatic but disciplinary, and moreover, that the Fathers meant 
civil authorities when they speak of the Church. The festive 
Frenchman enjoys the epithet of Pedestal-destroyer of Saints. 
He knows better now. 

Joseph II., sacristan Emperor of Austria, encouraged his 
courtiers to write in a more modified sense. These men cau- 
tiously leave aside the interpretation of Launoy, stating that the 
interpretation in favor of ecclesiastical or civil authority is a 
matter of doubt. 

Leopold, Grand Duke of Tuscany, undertook to follow the 
example of his brother Joseph, and found a willing tool in 
Scipio Ricci, who adopted, in the synod of Pistoja, the 
Josephine errors. This synod was like some other diocesan synods, 
where the ignorant voted and the learned wept. Pius VI., in his 
bull Auctorem Fidei, of 1794, following the demonstration of good 
sense made on the part of the people, in 1787, made short 
work of Bishop Ricci. The ruffian recanted, but did not 
reform priests reform, bishops, never ; Judas Iscariot leads the list. 

The Pian Bull declares that whatever is asserted as to the 
right of rulers concerning diriment impediments, and opposed to 
canons, 3, 4, 9, 12, Sess. 24, (C. T.), is eversive and heretical, 
which qualifications are to be separately taken. Each proposi- 
tion enjoys the privilege of a particular censure. 

The synod petitioned the civil power to grant what it was 
most anxious to accord, that the impediments of spiritual 
consanguinity and public decorum should be ignored in future 
legislation. Likewise a request was made that the impediments 
arising from licit and illicit consanguinity should be computed, 
according to the Napoleonic code, in direct and collateral lines, 
shutting out all hopes of dispensation beyond these. Any one 
cognisant of the political state of affairs in Europe behind the 
scenes, will understand the animus of this attempted legislation. 


Pius VI. declares the above nonsense, as tending to the 
subversion of ecclesiastical authority, contrary to the Tridentine 
Council, and a legitimate product of the heretical principle 
already condemned. 

In the wake of these followed many others of less notoriety. 
Of these are Vigil and Nuytz, the former an American from Lima. 

As to Nuytz, Pius IX. (loth June, 1851) says that his as- 
sertions that Christ did not raise Matrimony to the dignity of 
a Sacrament ; that it is accessory to the contract, and separable 
from it ; that its sacramental character consists in the nuptial 
blessing ; that the bond is not indissoluble ; that the Church has 
no power to introduce matrimonial impediments, and the power 
which she has usurped ought to be taken away from her, and 
restored to the civil authority ; that matrimonial cases and espousals 
naturally come under civil jurisdiction; that the Church in this 
matter assumed power little by little, which the civil authority 
passively allowed ; that the Tridentine decrees to the contrary 
are either disciplinary or of civil interpretation, are false. 

The Sovereign Pontiff declares that all the foregoing statements 
are false, as also those which insinuate that the Tridentine de- 
cree has no effect where it is overridden by the law of the 
land ; that Boniface VIII. ever declared that the vow of chas- 
tity made in ordination, nullified a previous nuptial contract ; in 
fine the Vicar of Christ declares all the above as destructive of 
the Catholic faith, etc. 

In defence of the rights of the Church, soldiers have never 
been wanting. Amongst the ablest and best is Professor Feije 
of the Catholic University of Louvain. 

The venerable doctor opens his thesis ' by stating that it is 
certain and proximate to faith ; that the Tridentine canons 3 
and 4 are dogmatical ; consequently the opposite proposition 
is false and proximate to heresy. He quotes Deodati, de Frank- 
enberg, Perrone, and Martin, the latter of whom accuses his 
adversaries of heresy. 

It is certain and proximate to faith, that the Fathers of 
the Council meant in this canon the hierarchial authority of the 
Church in a strict sense. No other meaning can be deduced 
from the adjuncts ; when the Church speaks indefinitely of herself, 
the magisterial and doctrinal Church is invariably understood. 
The Fathers had Luther's errors in view, and finally, just at this 

1 In his volume De Impedimcnlis. 


time, the same Fathers had a petition from temporal princes, 
requesting the introduction of a new impediment, to wit, the 
consent of parents, which they refused to grant. 

It is a dogma of Catholic belief that the Church has an innate 
right to decree prohibent and diriment impediments. Neither 
princely concessions nor connivances can be considered as sources 
of her authority. The opposite assertion is heretical. Pius VI., 
in his condemnation of the acts of the synod of Pistoja, pro- 
claims the doctrine which denies the Church exclusive legislation 
in matrimonial matters a heretical principle. 

It is a dogma of Catholic belief that matrimonial cases, inas- 
much as belongs to their spiritual character, are exclusively of 
ecclesiastical jurisdiction. 

It is certain that all matrimonial cases are exclusively of 
ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Pius VI., in his famous letter of Sept. 
1 6th, 1788, says that it is a dogma of faith that Matrimony is 
one of the seven sacraments; hence the Church only can decide 
upon its validity ; that it is rash to write or speak otherwise, 
and that such language is foreign to the teaching of the Church 
and Apostolic usages. He repeats the anathema launched by 
the Council of Trent against those who deny jurisdiction to 
the Church in thsee matters; he calls the interpretation which 
is favorable to civil interference, even as to taking cognizance 
of the mere facts in the case, captious ; the words bdng 
general, says the Supreme Pontiff, admit of no limitation ; 
hence it is most certain and beyond doubt, that the Church 
has the exclusive right to legislate in matrimonial affairs. It is 
to be noted that Pius VI., in the heading of his letter, speaks 
of the power of teaching and confirming in the faith conferred 
upon him. Pius VII. reiterates this doctrine in his letter to the 
Archbishop of Mayence. Hence, when the civil power wishes to 
interfere, for the sake of the civil effects, with regard to the 
nullity or validity of marriage, the Church must be always con- 
sulted in the first place, and her decision submitted to ; not 
only in the essentials, but also as to the adjuncts, as the essence 
of all law demands. 

As to the question of espousals, Pius VI. settles it. The 
Pontiff, condemning the synod of Pistoja, says that the proposi- 
tion which maintains that espousals properly so-called are civil 
acts is false, injurious to the canons of the Church, and deroga- 
tory to her discipline. 


Finally, wherever things had come to such a pass, in consequence 
of rebellion against the Holy See, that the civil authorities arro- 
gated to themselves jurisdiction in these matters, the acknowl- 
edgement of Church authority was one of the conditions of forgive- 
ness, and an essential clause of all concordats. 

All the above enumerated opinions, contrary to the teaching 
of the Church, are discarded by Catholics. There are some 
opinions, however, which, though erroneous, are not clearly con- 
demned, and others which as yet can be freely held and taught. 

It is a free question whether the civil powers can legislate as 
to creating impediments to the marriages of the faithful and un- 
baptized unbelievers. 

Some Catholic canonists admit the civil authorities to a joint 
jurisdiction with the Church, and some of these again say that 
this is a cognate right arising from the nature of the institution: 
adding, however, that Christ, by a positive act of His Will, of 
the Church acting for Him, has deprived the civil power of its 
innate right. Other canonists went still farther, and held that 
the right of establishing impediments is inherent in the State as 
well as in the Church, and, moreover, that it can be lawfully 
used. Carriere, one of the defenders of this doctiine, and their 
chief, repudiated it in obedience to the Holy See. This doctiine 
is false, and the contrary, certain, to wit : the State has no juris- 
diction in connection with the marriages of the faithful, or 
declaration or revocation of diiiment impediments thereto per- 
taining. Carriere's opinion is opposed to all theological and 
canonical reasons based on the decisions of the Holy See. 

Although he himself recanted his errors, his arguments remain, 
and are used by persons less honest than he. It is worth while 
to look at them. His manner of reasoning is about thus : He 
invokes the authority of the Gallican theologians and the support 
of some foreigners, amongst whom he places Sanchez, the 
theology of Salamanca, Pirhing and Selvagius. As to the Gallicans, 
he says that his is their common opinion, and confesses that the 
foreigners distinguish between the inherent right and its loss, by 
the reservation made by the Church. The Gallicans deny this 
reservation, and urge that this right, with many others, was 
relinquished by pious princes ; the date is not known, and in 
any case they could not be deprived of their rights, and conse- 
quently were not. 

As to the weight of Gallican and foreign authorities, he re- 


marks that many acknowledge the right of the State, amongst 
whom ranks P. Soto, a papal theologian at the Tridentine 
Council. As to those who think differently, they have not 
examined the matter thoroughly, and many of them contradict 
one another and weaken the thesis by referring to the imaginary 

As to Moser's assertions concerning the Gallican theologians, 
he is incorrect, according to Carriere, when he says, that, at the be- 
ginning of the XVII. century, the Gallican theologians unani- 
mously attributed this right solely to the Church, whereas Habert, 
quoted by Moser, treats of a totally different thing, and others, 
quoted by the same author, expressly admit the. power of the State. 
The Frenchman is indignant at Moser's charge against his 
countrymen of concealing their opinions from the public, and winds 
up by denying that the Gallicans who refuse to acknowledge 
this right in the State, or those who admit the theory and 
repudiate the practice, or restrict it to the civil contract, while 
excluding its natural and sacramental character, can be alleged 
against him. Much less are those to be counted amongst his 
adversaries, who have given due attention to the subject and its 
cognate and consecutive features. 

In view of these facts, Carriere thinks that he is justified in 
going over the ground anew, because the Gallicans differ from 
foreigners on the subject ; and hence there is no certain decision 
of any theological school. There is only preponderance of opinion, 
a common opinion at the most, which can be lawfully called 
in question, on account of his discovery of new and powerful 
arguments. It appears to me that in the Frenchman's mind no 
opinion is certain unless it is almost equivalent to an article 
of faith. 

The learned author (Carriere) places in juxtaposition the 
arguments on both sides of the question, telling us, however, be 
forehand, what side he wishes us to embrace. He classifies them 
under a triple head derived from the nature of matrimony itself, 
the mutual relations of both powers, and the chief authorities in 
favor of the teaching of the Church. He also makes a scale of 
degrees of likelihood and certitude; he asserts that the question 
is open for discussion, in fact one of those which are denomi- 
nated free questions in the language of theology. He admits 
that foreign theologians of the greatest weight and superiority of 
number, are opposed to h ; m ; he claims, however, that their 


authority is not decretorial in fact, or in possible effect, but 
simply calculated to create a greater or lesser degree of proba- 
bility ; consequently, if an equal degree of probability can be ar- 
rived at by refuting or explaining away these opinions, that 
obstacle may be removed. He asserts that the Gallican writers 
allege the stronger arguments. In comparing opinions, he thinks 
that he finds a superiority of argument amongst his countrymen, 
because there is more acumen in their reasoning. He places 
great stress on the practical force and efficacy of the civil 
statutes, and introduces that system of opportunism, so dear to 
Frenchmen, and, that, so long as certitude cannot be obtained, the 
safer opinion should be adopted, which is defined by him as that 
which involves the fewest complications. The Gallicans adopt 
that opinion which is, according to him, the most favorable on 
all sides, favorable to the Church, the State, and the contracting 

He apprehends, that, if it should be true that the State has 
the power of creating impediments, all marriages contracted in 
spite of these impediments would be null ; so it is better to 
adopt his opinion, even if it be erroneous. 

Our author did not shrink from the consequences of his 
doctrine, and hence he practically decides, that, in case [a merely 
civil impediment exists and is ignored, the contracting parties 
expose themselves to the danger of nullity. The civil contract is 
advisable for thej safety of the Sacrament, because it depends 
upon the contract, and its effects begin to operate only when 
the contract is perfected. He denominates the religious marriage 
an incipient marriage, from the use of which the parties must 
abstain until civilly ratified. A second marriage, contracted before 
the ratification, is valid, according to him, and the first null. If 
both the religious and civil rites take place, and a civil im- 
pediment is discovered, the use of matrimony is sinful, and its 
nullification can be sought for. He hesitates to admit, that, even in 
case of necessity, the religious celebration can be allowed until 
the civil ordinances are complied with, and in case such marriage 
takes place, it should be ratified by the civil authority, and 
continence observed as far as practice is concerned. He does 
not dare to pronounce upon the liceity of its use, in case 
the civil impediment is not diriment, nor does he know how to 
act in regard to a second marriage. He thinks that, practically, 
whatsoever appears more probable may be adopted. He confesses, 


that, in his practical solutions, he is without a leader, nor does 
he wish to act as one himself, but refers such matters to higher 
authority, and expresses an ardent desire for an agreement between 
Church and S:ate on the subject. It is obvious that these 
opinions involve many difficulties when dispensations are sought 
for, the seat of the dispensing power being rendered uncertain. 

This is a sample of Galilean argument. Those who refuse to 
acknowledge the authority of the State, cannot ground their 
argument on a reservation made by the Church. Their position 
is weak as to right and fact. They must, then, fall back on the 
nature of the institution, or on its sacramental character ; if the 
former is advanced, its defenders will admit that the good of 
society is sufficiently protected by civil legislation, as to the civil 
effects and the legal bond. It is difficult, however, to hold this 
position, without strengthening at the same time that of Carriere; 
yield, however, to him, and all the parts cohere together. If 
the exclusive right of the Church is traceable to the sacramental 
element, such has resulted in two ways, either as a natural 
consequence of the elevation of marriage to the dignity of a 
sacrament, or from a positive act of Christ's will, consulting the 
reverence due to the sacrament. Those who adopt the former 
theory argue weakly ; those who have recourse to the positive 
will of Christ are little better off, because there is no positive 
proof, and interference in temporal matters is not in harmony 
with Christian economy. Still, they can argue that it is in accord- 
ance with the wisdom of Christ that such an important contract 
may depend upon the uniform and merciful laws of the 
Church, rather than upon the contradictory and ofien unreasonable 
legislation of States ; thus are prevented the discords and con- 
flicts which, if not necessarily, at least easily, would flow from 
its subjection to the dual power. That Christ really did this, 
can be proven by the authorities quoted, and this is the doctrine 
of the Church. We do not hesitate to say that it is certain, in 
the theological sense, that the State does not enjoy the right 
of determining diriment impediments. The contrary is not a free 
opinion, although not of faith. 

It is unnecessary to bestow a thought on the pretended 
reservation made by the Church. Her claims, as we shall see, 
are founded on better ground and a more solid foundation. 





[This brief will be, to futuie generations, a grand historical 
monument. Its terms should be scanned, and its spirit and 
intent understood by all concerned, that is, by every cultured 
Catholic in America. By the very charter of the University, 
provision is made that it shall never sink into a school of 
conceited philosophy or philosophical Christianity, as so many 
universities of Europe did within a generation or two. The 
main task of the Vatican Council was to counteract the influence, 
and withstand the further spread and development of these seats 
of false science.] 

Dilecte fili noster, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. 

Quod in novissimo conventu anno MDCCCLXXXIV Baltimore 
habito ccmmuni venerabi'ium fratrum Americae Borealis episcc- 
porum voto propositum fuerit, de studiorum Universitate in istius 
Reipublicae gremio erigenda, id modo tibi caeterisque ecclesiarum 
istarum pastoribus in animo esse reipsa auspicari, communibus 
litteris die 25 octobris elapso anno ad Nos datis intelleximus. 
Maxime vero delectati sumus praeclaro fidei vestras testimonio, ac 
sjncero pietatis obsequio in hanc Apostolicam Sedem, cujus 
patrocinio ac tutelse Academiam a primo ejus excrdio commen- 
datis. Perpetua enim pastorum Ecclesise, praesertim vero Ponti- 
ficum Maximorum laus semper extitit, veri nominis scientiam 
strenue provehere, studioseque curare, ita disciplinas, imprimis 
theologicas ac philosophicas, ad fidei normam in scholis tradi, 
ut, conjunctis revelationis ac rationis viribus, invictum inde fidei 
propugnaculum constitueretur. Itaque Decessores Nostri de 
erudiendo christiano populo vehementer solliciti, elapsis tempo- 
ribus, nullis unquam curis laboribusque pepercerunt ut in 
praecipuis Europae urbibus celeberrima scientiarum domicilia, 
Academiae scilicet studiorum, excitarentur, quee turn media aetate 
turn sequentibus saeculis florentissimam hominum doctissimorum 
segetem christianae civilisque reipublicae emolumento pfaebuere. 

In hunc finem Nos ipsi simul ac Ecclesiae gubernacula regenda 
suscepimus, sedulam instaurandis studiis dedimus operam, et 
praeserlim ad praeclaram Thomae Aquinatis doctrinam restituen- 
dam atque in pristinum decus vindicandam animum viresque 
adjecimus, id spectantes ut in graviarum disciplinarum cultu, 


ratione semper habita eorum omnium quae scite sapienterque re- 
centiori aevo docti homines industria sua protulerunt ad nobilis- 
simam veterum sapientiam informaretur ratio philosophandi, eaque 
disciplinam Angelici Doctoris docili studio sequeretur. Certum 
autem Nobis exploratumque erat, ea scientiarum renovationc 
perfecta, litterarum etiam caeterarumque humanarum disciplinarum 
studia, cum verae pietatis cultu conjuncta, plurima in civilem 
societatem conferre commoda posse. Quae quidem nostrorum 
temporum in periculis quibus apud Europe gentes juventus est 
obnoxia, manifeste cernuntur, ac vos ipsi, inspectis America? 
Borealis conditionibus, quanti facienda et quam gravis momenti 
sint aperte cognoscitis. Quippe immoderata cogitandi sciibendi- 
que libertas, ex pravis circa divinas humanasque res sentiend: 
modis late diffusis uti in Europa ita apud vos suborta, effrsena. 
tarum opinionum radix est atque origo ; religione vero ut 
plurimum a scholis exulare coacta, nefarii homines fallacis 
sapientiae aestu christianam fidem in adolescentium animis extin- 
guere, impietatisque facem succendere audaciter moliuntur. 

Quapropter necesse est juvenilem astatem sanioris doctrinas 
pabulo diligentius enutrire, praesertim vero eos adolescentes qui 
in Ecclesiae spem succrescunt armis omnibus communire quibus 
propugnandae catholicae veritatis causaa pares evadant. 

Nos itaque consilium vestrum quo communis salutis studio 
permoti, inclytaeque istius Reipublicae bono consulentes, studiorum 
Universitatem constituere aggredimini, libentissime excipimus ultro- 
que probamus. 

Quo vero nobilissimum hoc institutum feliciter perficiatur ma- 
joraque in dies incrementa suscipiat, ita sub auctoritate tutdaque 
omnium regionis istius pr&sulum perpetuo esse oportet, ut 
administratio universa ab ipsis, per episcopos ad id muneris 
delectos, geratur, quorum sit, studiorum rationem definire, leges 
ferre disciplinae tuendae, doctores caeterosque Academiae administros 
eligere, aliaque ordinare quae ad optimam ejus Academiae guber- 
nationem pertineant. Quae vero de his omnibus constituta fuerint 
par est ut examini hujus Apostolicae Sedis exhibeantur, quo ejus 
auctoritate probentur. De urbe vero in qua Universitas studiorum 
sit erigenda, cupimus ut cum caeteris Fcederatorum Statuum 
episcopis consilia communicentur, rogataque singulorum sententia 
de hac re decernatur. 

Perge igitur, Dilecte Fili Noster, cum caeteris V V. F F istius 
Americanae regionis episcopis, concordi animo coepta perficere, 


nee quisquam vestrum ulla difficuUate aut labore deterreatur ; 
firma spe fretus sese uberrimos fructus ex curis ac sollicitudinibus 
esse relaturum, iis fundamentis et praesidiis positis quibus digni 
sacrorum ministri ad curandam fidelium salutem et catholicam 
pietatem propagandam optimique in republica cives habeantur. 
Nos vero enixe Deum rogamus ut mittat e sedibus suis 
assistricem sapientiam quae mentes et corda omnium vestrum 
dirigat, et divinorum munerum auspicem praecipuaeque benevolen- 
tiae Nostrae testem tibi, dilecte fili Noster, cunctisque venerabilibus 
Fratribus Foederatorum Statuum archiepiscopis et episcopis, 
caeterisque omnibus qui vobis hac in re opem sua liberalitate 
contulerint Apostolicam benedictionem peramanter impertimus. 

Datum Romae apud S. Petrum, die 10 Aprilis 1887, Pontificatus 
Nostri decimo. 


* * * December I4th, 1887. 

REV. SIR : Would you please be so kind as to answer, through the 
PASTOR, on what is founded that : after a sick person has received Holy 
Communion per modutn Viatici, we can no more administer Holy Communion 
unless that person can receive fasting ? I had the case in question here, 
and as I wanted to follow what is said in PASTOR, Vol. V., No. 3, page 92, 
and thus abstain from giving Holy Communion post Viaticum, unless the 
patient could receive fasting, I was ordered to administer Holy Cummunion 
as often as the sick person, unable to fast, would wish to receive. I 
yielded, not because I was told that St. Liguori allows it, as I know, but 
because I could not find through the PASTOR any positive reason to 

In favoring us with the desired answer you will greatly oblige, 

Yours truly in Xto, 

* Priest. 

In regard to this matter it can hardly be said that there is 
any controversy among theologians. One case alone excepted, 
the approach, namely, of death, or such imminence of danger of 
death as to make it quite within the range of possibilities, if 
not strictly speaking probable or an even chance, that the com- 
munion may be the last the person will live to receive the 
blessed eucharist cannot be given to persons not fasting. 
Whenever the sickness is of its nature deadly, we can generally 
give communion over and over again to persons not fasting ; 


because in this hypothesis it is a struggle for life between the 
invalid and the disease. We do not know enough of disease, 
the human body, etc., to be able to say with certainty whether 
the disease or the remnant left of the invalid's constitution will 
ultimately win. The probabilities may be in favor of the con- 
stitution, and strongly so. But, however strong, the very supposi- 
tion allows a slender probability to the other side, sufficient to 
justify us in taking the safer way. In a few hours the disease 
may take a turn for the worse and make recoveiy hopeless. The 
one thing for us to keep in view is that the sickness is of its 
nature death -deal ing. Attacked by such a sickness, the person is 
stuggling with death, and while so struggling we can count it 
quite within the possibilities that any communion may be the 

There are some diseases known to be deadly, of which we 
should not thus argue, for instance, incipient cancer, or consump- 
tion in its early stages. In such cases, though it may be known 
that ultimate recovery is hopeless, it may be equally well known 
that death is no more imminent than the day of doom. It will 
come, but when ? In their later stages we should treat these 
diseases as deadly, because a sudden hemorrhage, coughing, or 
other change may unexpectedly end their lives. Hence we need 
not require them to be fasting in order to receive. There is 
always ground enough to fear that each communion may be 
the last. 

''Si autem rnorbus diuturnus quidem sed non lethalis est, 
Sacra Eucharissia non jejuno dari nequit ; at ha3c est ratio cur 
aliquoties, media nocte vix elapsa, ad eum deferri possit vel 
etiam debeat. " Lehmkuhl, II. 161. 

A correspondent wishes us to define when should the people 
kneel, when stand, and when sit during Mass, high or low. 
Rubric xvii. in the Rubrics Generales Missalis' must be our 
guide in this matter, but rubric xvii. as modified by legitimate 
local usage. With the public usage of a place in things of this 
kind, individual clergymen should not presume to interfere until 
the ordinary see fit to move in the matter. He it is who has 
official charge of the rites and ceremonies in his diocese, and he 
may have very satisfactory reasons, approved by the rubrics 
themselves, for quietly tolerating departures from the letter of the 
law. The law is laid down in this rubric xvii. of the Rubrica 


Generates Missalis. That is the universal law and, .as modified 
by local and legitimate usage, binding everywhere. 


All publications to be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the Editor, Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranford, N. J. 

THE GLORIES OF MARY, by St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church. 

Edited by Rev. Eugene Grimm, C. SS. R. Two vols., octavo, cloth, pp. 

474-469. Benziger Bros., 1887. 

Appendix containing all the Vesper Psalms and the Magnificat, the 

Responses for Vespers, the Antiphons of the Blessed Virgin, and various 

Hymns for Benediction : designed for the use of Catholic Choirs and 

Schools, by J. Singenberger. Third revised and enlarged edition. 

I2mo., boards, pp. 97. Pustet & Co., 1888. 
A GARDEN OF ROSES. Stories and Sketches by Maurice Francis Egan. 

I2mo., cloth, pp. 278. Thomas B. Noonan & Co., Boston, 1887. 

Sanctuary, and of the Wonderful Apparition and Miraculous Translation, 

in 1467, of Our Lad/s Sacred Image, from Scutari to Genezzano. 

Compiled, by permission, from the work of Mgr. George F. Dillon, 

D. D., Missionary Apostolic, by Anne R. Bennett, nee Gladstone. 

i6mo., cloth, pp. 223. Benziger Bros. 1888. 

R. L. Burtsell, D. D. Octavo, pamphlet, pp. 106. 
WHATEVER is, WAS, by Geo. A. Young. Large octavo, cloth, pp. xv. 

481. Legget Brothers, New York, 1887. 
BIBLE STORIES FOR LITTLE CHiLDREN--Il'ustrated. 32mo., paper, pp. 

124. Benziger Bros.. 1887. 
THE NEW MANUAL OF THE LIVING ROSARY, containing the History, 

Constitution, Rules, Customs and Indulgences of the Sodality. 32mo., 

pp. 32. Benziger Bros., 1887. 
THE CATHOLIC FAMILY ANNUAL for 1888. Octavo, pp. 120. The Catholic 

Publication Society Co. 
THE CATHOLIC HOME ALMANAC for 1888. Small quarto, pp. 64, double 

columns. Benziger Bros. 

\_The issue of the first number of the sixth -volume of THE 
PASTOR was delayed owing to illness. The second number will 
follow ike first as fast as the mtchanical part of the work can 
be done. For this second number we reserve any remarks we may 
think it proper to make on the books above mentioned. ED.] 

"Op/o magt's sentire compunclionem quam scire ejus definitionem* " a Kempis. 


DECEMBER, 1887. 

No. 2. 


(Continued from p. 19.) 

[Whoso holds or accepts, as his belief, opinion, conv ction, any of the following 
proposiiions, by the very fact renounces his allegiance to Christ and His Church.] 


Pantheism, Naturalism and absolute Rationalism. 
i. No supreme, omniscient, all-provident divine being, distinct 
from this universe, exists : God is the same thing as Nature, 
and, consequently, subject to change ; in reality, God is produced 
in man, in the world ; all things are God, and all things have 
the same identical substance with God : God is one and the 
same thing with the world ; and hence the spiritual and the 






Patttfieismus, Naturalismus et Rationalismus absolutiis. 

I. Nullum supremum, sapientissimum, providentissimumque Numen Di- 
vinum existit ab hac rerum universitate distinctum, et Deus idem est ac 
rerum natura, et idcirco immutationibus obnoxius, Deusque reapse fit in 
homine et mundo, atque omnia Deus sunt et ipsissimam Dei habent substan- 
tiam ; ac una eademque res est Deus cum mundo, et proinde spiritus 
cum materia, necessitas cum libertate, verum cum falso, bonum cum' malo, 
et justum cum injusto. 

(Alloc. Maxima quiJem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1887. All rights reserved. 


material, necessity and liberty, the true and the false, good and 
evil, justice and injustice, are all the selfsame thing. 

2. All interference of God with man or the things of this 
world is to be denied. 

3. Human reason, irrespective entirely of God, is itself the sole 
judge of what is true .and what is false, of what is good and 
what, evil ; it is law unto itself, and by its own natural powers 
able to secure the welfare both of the individual and society. 

4. All truths of religion come of the natural powers of the 
human intellect ; hence reason is the chief means by which 
man can and should attain a knowledge of any kind of truth. 

5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and being so, is subject to 
continual and indefinite progress corresponding to the progress 
of human reason. 

6. Faith in Christ is counter to human reason ; and divine 
revelation is not only useless, but even injurious to the develop- 
ment of man. 

7. The prophecies and miracles set forth and related in the 

2. Neganda est omnis Dei actio in homines et munclum. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

3. Humana ratio, nullo prorsus Dei respectu habito, unicus est veri et 
falsi, boni et mali arbiter, sibi ipsi est lex, et naturalibus suis viribus ad 
hominum ac populorum bonum curandum sufficit. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

4. Omnes Religionis veritates ex nativa humanae rationis vi derivant; 
hinc ratio est princeps norma, qua honv> cognitionem omnium cujuscum- 
fjue generis veritatum assequi possit ac debeat. 

("F.pist. encycl. Qui phiribns, 9 Novembris 1846. Epist. encycl. 
'Singulars quidem, 17 Martii 1856. Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 
Junii 1862.) 

5. Divina revelatio est imperfecti, et idcirco subjecla continuo et indefini- 
te progressui, qui human ae rationis progressioni respondeat. 

(Epist. encycl. Qui pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846. Alloc. Maxima 
quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

6. Christi -fides humanae refragatur ration! ; divinaque revelatio non solum 
nihil prodest, verum etiam nocet hominis perfection!. 

(Epist. encycl. Qu>i pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846. Alloc. Maxima 
quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

7. Prophetiae et miracula, in Sacris Litteris exposita et narrata, sunt poeta- 
rum commenta, et Chrislianae Fidei mysteria philosophicarum investigationum 
summa; et utriusque Testament! libris mythica continentur inventa; ipse- 
que Jesus Christ us est mythica fictio. 

(JEpist. encycl. Qui .pluribus., ,9 Novembris 1846. Alloc. Maxima 
qtiidem, 9, Junii 1862.) 


Sacred Scriptures are but the fictions of poets, and the mys- 
teries of the Christian faith are but the conclusions of philosophical 
investigations : and in both Testaments are found mythical 
stories ; even Jesus Christ himself is but a mythical fiction. 


Moderate Rationalism. 

8. As human reason is equivalent to religion, theological and 
philosophical subjects should be dealt with in the same way. 

9. All the dogmas of the Christian religion, without distinction 
are objects of natural science, that is, of philosophy : and human 
reason, developed only by the advance of civilization, can of 
itself, and resting on its own principles, acquire correct notions 
of all these dogmas, even of the more obscure, provided only 
it occupy itself with their consideration. 

10. Whereas the philosopher is one thing and philosophy 
another, the former should, of course, be subject to authority, 
when convinced himself that it is proper ; but philosophy 
neither can nor ought to be subject to any authority. 

11. The Church not only should never pronounce against 
theses philosophical, but should be tolerant of philosophy's errors, 
leaving it to philosophy itself to correct them. 


Rationalismus moderatus. 

; 8. Quum ratio humana ipsi Religion! asquiparetur, idcirco theologicse dis- 
cipline perinde ac philosophies tractandse sunt. 

(Alloc. Singulari quadam perfusi, 9 Decembris 1854.) 

9. Omnia indiscriminatim dogmata Religionis christianre sunt objectum 
naturalis scientise seu philosophise ; et humana ratio historice tantum exculta 
potest ex suis naturalibus viribus et principiis ad veram de omnibus etiam 
reconditioribus dogmatibus acientiam pervenire, modo hyec dogmata ipsi rationi 
tanquam objectum proposita fuerint. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Frising. Gravissimas, II Decembris 1862. Epist. 
ad eumdem Tit as libenter, 21 Decembris 1863.) 

10. Quum aliud sit philosophu, aliud philosophia, ille jus et officium habet 
se submittendi auctoritati quam veram ipse probaverit ; at philosophia neque 
potest, neque debet ulli sese submittere auctoritati. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Frising. Gravissimas, II Decembris 1862. Epist. 
ad eumdem Tuas libenter, 21 Decembris 1893.) 

11. Ecclesia non solum non debet in philosophiam unquam animadvertere, 
verum etiam debet ipsius philosophise tolerare errores, eique relinquere ut 
ipsa se corrigat. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Frising. Gravissimas, II Decembris 1862.) 


12. The decrees of the Holy See and of the Roman Congre- 
gations hinder the free progress of science. 

13. The method and the principles followed by the old 
scholastics in the study of theology are entirely unsuited to the 
needs of our time and to the progress of the sciences. 

14. Subjects philosophical are to be treated without any regard 
to the teachings of supernatural revelation. 

Indifferentism, Lalitudinarianism. 

15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion, 
which, guided by the light of reason, he thinks to be true. 

1 6. Men can find the way of salvation and attain eternal life 
in any form of religion. 

17. We may have well grounded hopes of the eternal salvation 
of all who are outside the Church of Christ. 

12. Apoatolicae Sedis Romanarumque Congregationum Decreta liberum 
scientiae progressum impediunt. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Frising. Tuas libenter, 21 Decembris 163.) 

13. Methodus et principia, quibus antiqui doctores scholastic! theologiam 
excoluerunt, temporum* nostrorum necessitatibus scientiarumque progressui 
minime congruunt. 

(Epist. *ad Archiep. Frising. Tuas libenter, 21 Decembris 1863.) 

14. Philosophia tractanda est, nulla supernaturalis revelationis habita ratione. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Frising. Tuas libenter, 21 Decembris 1863.) 
N. B. Cum rationalism! systemate cohserent maximam partem errores 
Antonii Giinther, qui damnatur in Epist. ad Card. Archiep. Colonien. 
Eximiam tuam, 15 Junii 1847, et in Epist ad Episc. Wraiislavien. Dolore 
hand mediocri, 30 Aprilis 1860. 

. III. 
Indifferentismus, Latitiidinarismus. 

15. Liberum cuique homini est earn amplecti et profited religionem, quam 
rationis lumine quis ductus veram putaverit 

(Litt, post. Multiples inter, 10 Junii 1851. Alloc. Maxima quidein, 
9 Junii 1862.) 

16. Homines in cujusvis religionis cultu viam aeternae salutis reperire 
aeternamque salutem assequi possunt. 

(Epiit. encycl. Qui pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846. Alloc. Ubi primum 
17 Decembris 1847. Epist. encycl. Singulari quidem, 17 Martii 

17. Saltern bene sperandum est de aeterna illorum omnium salute, qui 
in vera Christi Ecclesia nequaquam versantur. 

(Alloc. Singulari quadam, 9 Decembris 1854. Epist. encycl. Quanta 
conficiatmir, 10 Augusti 1863.) 


1 8. Protestantism is merely another form of the Christian re- 
ligion, in which, no less than in the Catholic Church, acceptable 
worship may be paid to God. 


Socialism, Communism, Secret Societies, Bible Societies, Clerico-liberal 



Errors regarding the Church and her Rights. 

19. The Catholic Church is not a fully organized and wholly 
independent society, nor does it possess abiding rights of it" own, 
conferred by its divine founder ; but it rests with civil govern- 
ments to determine what the rights of the Church are, and 
within what limits they may be exercised. 

20. Ecclesiastical superiors should not perform acts of jurisdic- 
tion, without the permission and consent of the civil government. 

18. Protestantismus non aliud est quam diversa verse ejusdem christianae 
Religionis forma, in qua oeque ac in Ecclesia catholica Deo placere datum 

(Epist. encycl. Noscitis ct Nobiscum, 8 Decembris 1849.) 

$. IV. 

Sociahsmus, Communisnius, Societates clandestine;, Socielates biblica:, Societa- 

tes clerico-liberales, 

Ejusmodi pastes stepe gravissimisque verborum fonnulis reprobantur in 
Epist. encycl. Qni pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846 ; in Alloc. Quibus quantis- 
que, 2O Aprilis 1849 ; in Epist. encycl. Noscitis et Nobiscutn, 8 Decembris 
1849; in Alloc. Singulari qnadam, 9 Decembris 1854; in Epist. encycl. 
Quanta conficiamur mazrore, 10 Augusti 1863. 

Errores de Ecclesia ejusqite juribits. 

19. Ecclesia non est vera perfectaque societas plane libera, nee pollet suis 
propriis et constantibus juribus sibi a divino suo Fundatore collatis, sed civilis 
potestatis est definire quae sint Ecclesiae jura ac limites, intra quos eadein 
jura exercere queat. 

(Alloc. Singulari qttadam, 9 Decembris. 1854. Alloc. Multis gravibns- 
que, 17 Decembris 1860. Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1^62.) 

20. Ecclesiastica potestas suam auctoritatem exercere non debet absque 
civilis gubernii venia et assensu. 

(Alloc. Meminit unusquisque, 30 Septembris 1861.) 


21. The Church has not the right to define dogmatically that 
the Catholic religion is the only true one. 

22. The bounds within which Catholic writers and teachers must 
keep are only those dogmas denned by the infallible Church and 
set forth as dogmas of the faith for the acceptance of all the 

23. The Roman Pontiffs and ecumenical councils have trans- 
gressed the limits of their powers, usurped the right of princes, 
and erred even in matters of faith and morals. 

24. The Church has no right to use force, nor has it any 
temporal power whatever, direct or indirect. 

25. In addition to the rights inherent in the episcopacy, some 
further rights in temporal matters have been expressly or tacitly 
granted by the civil powers. These of course can be revoked 
at will. 

26. Of itself, the Church has no right, properly so called, 
either to acquire or hold property. 

27. The sacred ministers of the Church and the Roman 

21. Ecclesia non habet potestatem dogmatice definiendi, Religionem catho- 
licse Ecclesire esse unice veram Religionem. 

(Litt. Apost. Multiplices inter, 10 Junii 1851.) 

22. Ohligatio, qua catholic! magistri et scriptores omnino adstringuntur, 
coarctatur in iis tantum, quse ab infallibili Ecclesiae judicio veluti Fidei 
dogmata ab omnibus credenda proponuntur. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Prising. Tuas libenter, 21 Decembris 1863.) 

23. Romani Pontifices et Concilia CEcumenica a limitibus suse potestatis 
recesserunt, jura principum usurparunt, atque etiam in rebus fidei et morum 
definiendis errarunt. 

(Litt. Apost. Multiplices inter, IO Junii 1851.) 

24. Ecclesia vis inferendae potestatem non habet, neque potestatem ullam 
temporalem directam vel indirectam. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolicic, 22 August! 1851.) 

25. Prseter potestatem episcopatui inhaerentem, alia est attributa tempo- 
ralis potestas a civili imperio vel expresse vel tacite concessa, revocanda 
propterea, cum libuerit, a civili imperio. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

26. Ecc'esia non habet nativum ac legitimum jus acquirendi ac possidendi. 

(Alloc. A'umquam fore, 15 Decembris 1856. Epist. encycl. Incredi- 
l>ile, 17 Septembris 1863.) 

27. Sacri Ecclesire ministri Romanusqne Pontifex ab omni rerum tempo- 
ralium cura ac dominio sunt omnino excludendi. 

(Alloc. Maxima qnidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 


Pontiff should be excluded from all care and from all ownership 
of temporary things. 

28. Without leave of their respective governments it is unlaw- 
ful for bishops to promulgate even Apostolic letters. 

29. Honors granted by the Sovereign Pontiff should be held 
as void, if not obtained through the intervention of the govern- 

30. The immunity of the Church and of ecclesiastics is derived 
from the civil power. 

31. The ecclesiastical court for the hearing of the civil or 
criminal causes of clerics in matters temporal should be wholly 
done away with, and that, without consulting, or even against 
the protests of, the Holy See. 

32. Without any violation of natural right and equity, that 
exemption which clerics enjoy from military service can be with- 
drawn ; and such withdrawal is demanded by the advance of 
society, especially in states that enjoy popular forms of govern- 

33. It does not belong exclusively, and as a matter of course 

28. Episcopis, sine gubernii venia, fas non est vel ipsas Apostolicas Lit- 
teras promulgare. 

(Alloc. Nunquam fore, 15 Decembris 1856.) 

29. Gratiae a Romano Pontifice concessse existimari debent tanquam irritae, 
nisi per gubernium fuerint imploratse. 

(Alloc. Nunqiiam fore, 15 Decembris 1856.) 

30. Ecclcsiae et personarum ecclesiasticarum immunitas a jure civili ortum 

(Litt. Apost. Multiplies inter, 10 Junii 1851.) 

31. Ecclesiasticum forum pro temporalibus clericorum causis sive civilibus 
sive criminalibus omnino de medio tollendum est, etiam inconsulta et re- 
clamante Apostolica Sede. 

(Alloc. Acerbissimum, 27 Septembris 1852. Alloc. Nunquam fore, 
15 Decembris 1856.) 

32. Absque ulla naturalis juris et oequitatis violatione potest abrogari per- 
sonalis immunitas, qua clerici ab onere subeundoe exercendDeque militise 
eximuntur; hanc vero abrogationem postulat civilis progressus, maxime in 
societate ad formam liberioris regiminis constituta. 

(Epist. a I Episc. Montis regal. Singularis Nobisque, 29 Septembris 

33. Non pertinet unice ad ecclesiasticam jurisdictionis potestatem proprio 
ac nativo jure dirigere theologicarum rerum doctrinam. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Frising. TIMS libenter, 21 Decembris 1863.) 


and inherent right, to ecclesiastical authority to supervise the 
teaching of theology. 

34. That tenet which likens the Roman Pontiff to a free 
prince, and as exercising jurisdiction throughout the entire Church, 
is one that came into vogue during the middle ages. 

35. There is nothing to prevent the Supreme Pontificate being 
transferred from the Bishop and City of Rome to another bishop 
and another city, either by a decree of a general council, or by 
the joint action of the Catholics throughout the world. 

36. A decision of a national council is not subject to revision, 
and the civil administration has a right to insist on this. 

37. National churches may be instituted and remain independent 
of, and entirely removed from, the authority of the Roman 

38. The unwarranted pretensions of the Roman Pontiffs helped 
to bring about the division of the Church into the Eastern and 
the Western. 


Errors regarding Civil Society, considered in itself and in its relations 

to the Church. 

39. The State, as the fount and foundation of all rights, has 
no limits set to its own right. 

34. Doctrina comparantium Romanum Pontificem principi libero et agenti 
in universa Ecclesia, doctrina est quae meclio sevo prsevaluit. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, 22 August! 1851.) 

35. Nihil vetat, alicujus Concilii Generalis sententia aut universorum 
populorum facto summum Pontificatum ab Romano Episcopo atque Urbe ad 
alium episcopum aliamque civitatem transferri. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad ApostoZicez, 22 August 1851.) 

36. Nationalis concilii definitio nullam aliam admittit disputationem, 
civilisque administratio rem ad hosce terminos exigere potest. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolic^, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

37 .Institui possunt rationales ecclesise, ab auctoritate Romani Pontificis 
subductos planeque divisse. 

(Alloc. Multis gravibiisqne, 17 Decembris 1860. Alloc. Jamdudum 
cernimus, 1 8 Martii 1861.) 

38. Divisioni Ecclesise in orientalem atque occidentalem nimia Romanorum 
Pontificum arbitria contulerunt. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, 22 Augusti 1851.) 


40. The teaching of the Catholic Church is adverse to the 
good and well-being of human society. 

41. To the secular ruler, even if an infidel, belongs a nega- 
tive indirect power over ecclesiastical affairs ; consequently the 
secular government not only possesses the right known as the 
exequatur, but to it also properly lies the appeal called ab abusu. 

42. In a conflict of the laws emanating from both jurisdictions, 
the secular and the ecclesiastical, the law of the secular is to 

43. The civil authority has the right to rescind and to declare 
and make void those solemn compacts (Concordats], entered into 
with the Apostolic See in regard to the use of rights bearing 
on ecclesiastical immunity, and to do so, too, without the consent 
of the Holy See and against its protest even. 

44. The civil authority has a right to deal with questions 
that concern only religion, morals, and jurisdiction in spirituals. 
Hence it can take cognizance of the instructions issued, in ful- 
filment of their duty, by ecclesiastical superiors for the guidance 

$ VI. 
Errores de societate civili turn in se, turn in sitis ad Ecclesiam relationibits spectata. 

39. Reipublicoe status, utpote omnium jurium origo et fons, jure quodam 
pollet nullis circumscripto limitibus. 

(Alloc, Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

40. Catholicse Ecclesiae doctrina humanse societatis bono et commodis 

(Epist. encycl. Qui pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846. Alloc. Quibus 
quantisque, 2O Aprilis 1849.) 

41. Civili potestati vel ab infideli imperante exercitce competit potestas 
indirecta negativa in sacra ; eidem proinde competit nedum jus quod vocant 
exequatur, setl etiam jus nppellationis, quarn nuncupant ab abusu. 

(Litt. Apost Ad Apostolica;, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

42. In conflictu legum utriusque potestatis, jus civile prsevalet. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica;, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

43. Laica potestas auctoritatem habet rescindendi, cleclarandi ac faciendi 
irritas solemnes conventiones (vulgo Concordata) super usu jurium ad ecclesias- 
ticam immunitatem pertinentium cum Sede Apostolica initas, sine hujus 
consensu, imo et ea reclamante. 

(Alloc. In consiftoriali, I Novembris 1850. Alloc. Multis giavibusque, 
17 Decembris i8'o.) 

44. Civilis auctoritas potest se immiscere rebus, quse ad religionem, mores 
regimen spirituale pertinent. Hinc potest de instructionibus judicare, quas 

Ecclesise pastores ad conscientiarum normam pro suo munere edunt ; quin 


of consciences ; nay, it can even make decisions regarding the 
divine Sacraments, and the dispositions required for their reception. 

45. The entire management of the public schools, in which 
the youth of a country gets its education, (episcopal seminaries 
being alone exempt to some extent,) can and ought to lie with 
the civil authority ; and so to lie with that authority that none 
other shall have any right to interfere, in regard to the discipline, 
the course of studies, the conferring of diplomas, or the selection 
and approving of the teachers. 

46. Even in clerical seminaries, the courses of studies are to be 
submitted for the approval of the civil authority. 

47. The best interests of civil society demand that the common 
schools, which are open to all children of whatsoever class of the 
people, as also all those public institutions intended for the 
higher studies and for the education of youth, should be entirely 
free from the authority of the Church, free from all ecclesiatical 
influence or interference, and be completely subject to the will 
of the civil and political powers, so as to be under the sway of 
the government, and in accord with the public opinion of the age. 

48. Catholics can approve a school system which does not in 

etiam potest de divinorum Sacramentorum administratione, et dispositionibus 
ad ea suscipienda necessariis decernere. 

(Alloc. In consistoriali* I Novembris 1850. Alloc. Maxima quidem, 
9 Junii 1862.) 

45. Totum scholarum publicarum regimen, in quibus juventus christianae 
alicujus reipublicse instituitur, episcopalilms duntaxat seminariis aliqua ratione 
exceptis, potest ac dcbet attribui auctoritati civili, et ita quidem attrihui, ut 
nullum alii cuicumque auctoritati recognoscatur jus immiscendi se in disciplina 
scholarum, in regimine studiorum, in graduum collatione, in delectu aut 
approbatione magistrorum. 

(Alloc. In consistoriali, I Novembris 1850. Alloc. Quibus luctuosis- 
simis, 5 Septembris 1851.) 

46. Imo in ipsis clericorum seminatiis methodus studiorum adhibenda 
civili auctoritati subjicitur. 

(Alloc. Nnnqiiam fore, 15 Decembris 1856.) 

47. Postulat optimi civilis societalis ratio, ut populates scholre qure patent 
omnibus cujusque e p->pulo classis pueris, ac publica universim instituta, 
quse litteris scvetioribusque disciplinis tradendis et educationi juventutis 
curandre sunt destinata, eximantur ab omni Ecclesice auctoritate, moderatrice 
vi et ingerentia, plcnoque civilis ac politicce auctoritatis arbitrio subjiciantur 
ad irriperantium placita et ad communium setatis opinionum amussim. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Friburg. Qntim non sine, 14 Julii 1864.) 

48. Catholicis viris probari potest ea juventutis instituendae ratio, quse sit 


elude religious instruction and excludes the authority of the 
Church, the aim of which would be, either exclusively or prim- 
arily, instruction in the sciences and in subjects looking to 
earthly ends. 

49. The civil authority has the right to prevent bishops and 
the faithful from free and mutual communication with the Roman 

50. The secular authority has the inherent right of choosing 
bishops, and can require them to take up the government of 
the diocese before receiving canonical institution and the Bulls 
from the Holy See. 

51. Nay, the secular government has the right to depose bish- 
ops from the exercise of their pastoral ministry, nor is it bound 
to obey the Roman Pontiff in matters pertaining to the episco- 
pacy and episcopal institution. 

52. The secular government can alter the age, fixed by the 
Church, at which men or women may be admitted to religious 
vows ; besides, it can forbid all religious communities to receive 
a subject to solemn profession without its permission. 

53. Those laws should be abrogated, that were made for up- 

a catholica Fide et ab Ecclesiae potestate sejuncta quseque rerum duntaxat 
naturalium scientiam ac terrense socialis vitoe fines tantummodo vel saltern 
primario spectet. 

(Epist. ad Archiep. Friburg. Quum non tine, 14 Julii 1864.) 

49. Civilis auctoritas potest impedire quominus sacrorum antistites et 
fideles populi cum Romano Pontifice libere ac mutuo communicant. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

50. Laica auctoritas habet per se jus prresentandi episcopos, et potest ab 
illis exigere ut ineant dioecesium procurationem antequam ipsi canonicam a 
S. Sede. institutionem et Apostolicas Litteras accipiant. 

(Alloc. Nimquam fore, 15 Decembris 1856.) 

51. Imo laicum gubernium habet jus deponendi ab exercitio pastoralis 
ministerii episcopos, neque tenetur obedire Romano Pontifici in iis, quse 
episcopatum et episcoporum respiciunt institutionem. 

(Litt. Apost. Multiplices inter, to Junii 1851. Alloc. Acerbissimum, 
27 Septembris 1852.) 

52. Gubernium potest suo jure immutare netatem ab Ecclesia prrescriptam 
pro religiosa tarn mulierum quam virorum professione, omnibusque religiosis 
Familiis indicere, ut neminem sine suo permissu ad solemnia vota nuncu- 
panda admittant. 

(Alloc. Nunquam fore, 15 Decembris 1856.) 

53. Abrogandae sunt leges, quae ad religiosarum Familiarum statnm 


holding religious communities and guaranteeing them certain 
rights and privileges ; nay, the goverment may lend assistance to 
any individuals who may desire to quit the monastic life, and 
break their solemn vows ; it may, likewise, extinguish these re- 
ligious houses entirely, as also collegiate churches, simple benefices, 
and patronal rights, and turn over their possessions and incomes 
to the administration and arbitrament of the civil authority. 

54. Kings aud princes are not only exempt from ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction themselves, but in settling questions of disputed juris- 
diction aie above the Church. 

55. The Church should be separated from the State, and the 
State from the Church. 


Errors regarding the Moral Law, whether from a natural or a 
Christian Standpoint. 

56. The moral law needs no divine sanction, nor is it at all 
necessary for human laws to conform to the law of nature, or 
derive their binding force from God. 

57. The science of philosophy and morals, and also civil laws, 

tutandum earumque jura et officia pertinent; imo potest civile gubernium iis 
omnibus auxilium prsestare, qui a suscepto religiosae vitae institute deficere 
ac solemnia vota frangere velint ; pariterque potest religiosas ea>dem Familias, 
perinde ac collegiatas ecclesias et beneficia simplicia, etiam juris patronatus, 
penitus extinguere, illorumque bona et reditus civilis potestatis administration! 
et arbitrio subjicere et vindicare. 

(Alloc. Acerbissimum, 27, Septembris 1852. Alloc. Probe memineritis, 
22 Januarii 1855. Alloc. Cum Sapc, 26 Julii 1855.) 

54. Reges et principes non solum ab Ecclesiae jurisdictione eximuntun 
verum etiam in qurestionibus jurisdictionis dirimendis supenores sunt Ec- 

(Litt. Apost. Multiplies inter, 10 Junii 1851.) 

55. Eccl"sia a Statu, Statusque ab Ecclesia sejungendus est. 

(Alloc. Acerbissimum, 27 Septembris 1852.) 

. VII. 
Errores de Ethica nattirali et chtistiana. 

56. Morum leges divina baud egent sanctione. minimeque opus est ut 
humanse leges ad naturae jus conformentur aut obligandi vim a Deo accipiant. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862.) 

57. Philosophicarum rerum morumque scientia, itemque civiles leges pos- 
sunt et debent a divina et ecclesiastica auc'oritate declinare. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9' Junii 1862.) 


can and ought to be unrestrained by divine and ecclesiastical 

58. Other forces than those found in matter are not to be ad- 
mitted, and all morality and honesty consists in piling up and in- 
creasing one's wealth by any means, and in gratifying one's desires. 

59. Right is to be sought in the material fact ; all the moral 
obligations of men are but meaningless expressions : all human 
fads have the force of right. 

60. Authority is nought else but numbers and the total of 
the material forces. 

61. The accidental injustice of a fact does no wrong to the 
sanctity of right. 

62. The principle known as that of non-intervention should be 
proclaimed and observed. 

63. It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate rulers, law- 
ful even to rise in rebellion against them. 

64. The breaking of any oath, how sacred soever, and the 
commission of any deed, wicked and flagitious and contrary to 

58. Alise vires non sunt agnoscendae nisi illae, quas in materia positse sunt, 
et omnis morum disciplina honestasque collocari debet in cumulandis et 
augendis quovis modo divitiis ac in voluptatibus explendis. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862. Epist. encycl. Quanta con- 
ficiamur, 10 Augusti 1863.) 

59. Jns in materiali facto consistit, et omnia hominum officia sunt nomen 
inane, et omnia humana facta juris vim habent. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem,, g Junii 1862.) 

60. Auctoritas nihil aliud est nisi numeri et materialium virium summa. 

(Alloc. Maxima quidem. 9 Junii 1862.) 

61. Fortunata facti injustitia nullum juris sanctitati detrimentum effart. 

(Alloc. Jamdudum cernimtis, 18 Martii 1861.) 

62. Proclamandum est et observandum principium quod vocant de non in- 

(Alloc. Novos et ante, 28 Septembris 1860.) 

63. Legitimis principibus obedientiam detrectare, imo et rebellare licet. 

(Epist. encycl. Qui pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846 Alloc. Quisque ves- 
trum, 4 Qctobris 1847. Epist. encycl. Noscitis et A r obiscum, 8 De- 
cembris 1849. Litt. Apost. Cum catholica, 26 Martii 1860.) 

64. Turn cujusque sanctissimi juramenti violatio, turn quaelibet scelesta 
flagitiosaque actio sempiternse legi repugnans, non solum baud est impro- 
banda, verum etiam omnino licita, summisque laudibus efferenda, quando id 
pro patri0e amore agatur. 

(Alloc. Quibus quantisque, 20 Aprilis 1849.) 


the divine law, though it be, is not only not blamable, but 
allowable and worthy of the highest praise, when done for the 
love of country. 

Errors regarding Christian Marriage. 

65. It cannot be at all admitted that Christ raised marriage 
to the dignity of a sacrament. 

66. The sacrament in matrimony is but an accessory to the 
contract, and separable from it : the sacrament consists solely 
in the nuptial blessing. 

67. By the law of nature the bond of matrimony is not in- 
dissoluble, and in various cases divorce, properly so-called, can 
be granted by the civil authorities. 

68. The Church has not the power to constitute diriment 
impediments : that power belongs to the State, which should re- 
move existing impediments. 

69. The Church, in the course of centuries, began to constitute 
impediments, but not as using authority of its own, but only 
authority borrowed of the State. 

70. The canons of the Council of Trent which anathematize 

$. VIII. 

Errores de Matrimonio Chiistiano. 


65. Nulla ratione ferri potest, Christum evexisse matrimonium ad dignita- 
tem Sacramenti. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, 22 August! 1851.) 

66. Matrimonii Sacramentum non est nisi quid contractui accessorium ab 
eoque separabile, ipsumque Sacramentum in una tantum nuptiali benedictione 
situm est. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, 22 Augusti, 1851.) 

67. Jure naturae matrimonii vinculum non est indissolubile, et in variis 
casibus divortium proprie dictum auctoritate civili sanciri potest. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostohcce, 22 Agusti 1851. Alloc. Acerbissimum, 
27 Septembris 1852.) 

68. Ecclesia non habet potestatem impedimenta matrimonium dirimentia 
inHucen'h'; sed ea potestas civili auctoritati compttit, a qua impedimenta 
cxistentia tollenda sunt. 

(Litt. Apost. Mitlliplices inter, 10 Junii 1851.) 

69. Ecclesia sequioribus sseculis dirimentia impedimentia inducere ccepit, 
noa jure proprio, sed illo jure usa, quod a civili potestate mutuata erat. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

70. Tridentini Canones, qui anathematis censuram illis inferunt, qui facul- 


all who dare deny that the Church has power to constitute 
diriment impediments, either are not dogmatic decrees, or are to 
be understood of this borrowed power. 

71. The canon Tametsi of Trent, requiring the parish priest's 
presence for the validity of marriage, becomes void where the 
civil law prescribes conditions of its own, and wishes that the 
marriage be valid when these conditions are complied with. 

72. Boniface VIII. was the first to assert that the vow of 
chastity, made at ordination, is a diriment impediment to mar- 

73. By a contract, merely civil, matrimony proper can be en- 
tered into between Christians ; and it is false to say that the 
nuptial contract between Christians is always a sacrament, so 
that, if there be no sncrament, there is no contract. 

74. Causes concerning marriage and marriage .engagements 
(sponsalia) belong of their very nature to the civil tribunal. 

. IX. 
Errors regarding the Temporal Power of the Roman Pontiff. 

75. The children of the Christian and Catholic Church are 

tatem impedimenta dirimentia inducendi Ecclesise negare audeant, vel non 
sunt dogmatici, vel de hac mutuata potestate intelligendi sunt. 
(Litt. Apost. Ad Aposlolica:, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

71. Tridentini forma sub infirmitatis poena non obligat, ubi lex civilis aliam 
formam praestituat, et velit, hac nova forma interveniente, matrimonium valere. 

(Litt. Aposf. Ad Apostoliccc, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

72. Bonifacius VIII. votum castitatis in ordinatione emissum nuptias nullas 
reddere primus asseruit. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Aposlolica;, 22 Augusti 1851.) 

73. Vi contractus mere civilis potest inter christianos constare veri nominis 
matrimonium; falsumque est, aut contractum matrimonii inter christianos 
semper esse Sacramentum, aut nullum esse contractum, si Sacramentum 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostoliac, 22 Augusti 1851. Lettera di S. S. Pio IX 
al Re di Sardegna, 9 Settembre 1852. Alloc. A'erbissimum, 27 
Septembris I 52. Alloc. Ahiltis gravibiisque, 17 Decembris 1860.) 

74. Causse matrimoniales et sponsalia suapte natura ad forum civile pertinent. 

(Litt. Apos*. Ad Apostolica;, 22 Augusti 1851. Alloc. Acerbissimum, 

27 Septembris 1852.) 

7v*. B. Hue facere possunt duo ilii errores da clericorum cselibatu abolendo, 
et de slatu ma'rimonii statui virginilatis anteferendo. Confodiuntur, prior in 
Epist encycl. Qni pluribus, 9 Novembris 1846; posterior in Litt. Apost. 
Mulliplices inter, 10 Junii 1851. 


not themselves of one mind as to the compatibility of the tem- 
poral with the spiritual sovereignty of the Pope. 

76. It would be very conducive to the liberty and peace of 
the Church, to have the Apostolic See relinquish the temporal 
power of which it is possessed. 

. X. 

Errors of Modern Liberalism. 

77. In this, our age, it is no longer expedient to have the 
Catholic religion the only religion of the State, to the exclu- 
sion of all other forms of worship. 

78. Hence it was wisely provided by statute in some Catholic 
countries, that strangers, coming into them to reside, should be 
allowed each one ine public exercise of his own form of wor- 

79. For it is false to say that to give full liberty to every form 
of worship, and to give every one unrestricted license openly and 

$. IX. 

Errores de civili Romani Pontificis principatu. 

75. De temporalis regni cum spiritual! compatibilitate disputant inter se 
christianse et catholicse Ecclesise filii. 

(Litt. Apost. Ad Apostolica, J2 Augusti 1851.) 

76. Abrogatio civilis imperii, quo Apostolica Sedes potitur, ad Ecclesiae 
Hbertatem felicitatemque vel maxime conduceret. 

(Alice. Qitibus qnantisque, 2O Pprilis 1849.) 

N. B. Prseter hos errores explicite notatos, alii complures imp^cite repro- 
bantur proposita et asserta doctrina, quarn calholici omnes firmissime retinere 
debeant, de civili Romani Pontificis principatu. Ejusmodi doctrina luculenter 
traditur in Alloc. Quibus qnantisque, 20 Aprilis 1849; in Alloc. Si semper 
antea, 20 Maji 1850; in Litt. Apost. Cum catholica Ecclesia, 26 Martii 1860; 
in Alloc. Novas, 28 Septembris i86c; in Alloc. Jamdudum, 18 Martii 1861 ; 
in Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9 Junii 1862. 

$. X. 

Errores qui ad Iweialismum hodiernnm referuntur. 

77. ^Etate hac nostra non amplius expedit religionem catholicam habere 
tanquam unicam Status religionem, coeteris quibuscumque cultibus exclusis. 

(Alloc. Nemo vestrum, 26 Julii 1853.) 

78. Hinc laudabiliter in quibusdam catholici nominis regionibus lege cau- 
tum est, ut hominibus illuc immigrantibus liceat publicum proprii cujusque 
cultus exercitium habere. 

(Alloc. Acerbissimum, 27 Septembris 1852.) 

79. Enimvero falsum est civilem cujusque cultus Hbertatem, itemque pie- 


publicly to declare his views and opinions, is apt to corrupt 
the minds and the morals of the people, and to aid in spread- 
ing the pest of indifferentism. 

80. The Roman Pontiff can and ought to reconcile himself 
to, and be in unison with progress, liberalism and modern 

In addition to the 80 propositions of the Syllabus proper, 
theologians formulate some ten others from the text of Quanta 
Cura. These are : 

1. That the best form of civil society and civil progress absolutely require 
human society to be constituted and governed without any regard to religion, 
no more than if such a thing did not exist, or, at the least, without 
recognizing any difference between the true religion and false ones. 

2. That the best form of civil government is that in which no obligation 
is assumed by the State to punish the violators of the Catholic religion. 

3. That liberty of conscience and of worship is the natural right of every 
individual : that this right should be proclaimed and maintained by public 
law in every properly constituted state, and that every citizen should have 
perfect freedom to declare and publish his views, whatever they be, and 
in so doing should not be interfered with, either by the civil or ecclesias- 
tical authorities. 

4. That the will of the people, manifested by what is called public 
opinion, or any other way, is the supreme law, and is paramount to every 
other law, human or divine, and that in political affairs consummated facts, 
simply because consummated, acquire thereby the force of right. 

5. Citizens and the Church, both, should be deprived of permission to 
give alms, openly, for institutions of Christian charity: and the law forbidding 
servile works on certain days on account of the worship of God should be 

6. Domestic society or the family exists not by any natural right, but 
only by concession of the civil government : and cousequently all the rights 
of parents over their children, especially that of training and educating 
them, are derived from and dependent on, the law ot the land only. 

7. The clergy, inasmuch as they are hostile to the real progress of science 
and civilization, should be allowed neither hand, act, or part in the training 
and education of youth. 

8. Laws of the Church, unless promulgated by the civil power, do not 
oblige in conscience ; the acts and decrees of the Roman Pontiffs regarding 

nam potestatcm omnibus attributam quaslibet opiniones cogitationesque palam 
publiceque manifestandi conducere ad populorum mores animosque facilius 
corrumpendos, ac indifferentismi pestem propagandam. 

(Alloc. Nnnquam fore, 15 Decembris 1856. 

80. Roimnus pontifex potest ac debet cum progressu, cum liberalismo, et 
cum recenti civilitate sese reconciliare et componere. 

(Alloc. Januhtdum cemimus, 18 Martii 1861.) 


the Church and religion need the sanction and approbation, or at least 
the assent, of the civil authority ; the Apostolic constitutions in which secret 
societies, whether oath-bound or not, are condemned, and in which their 
aiders and abettors are anathematized, have no furce in those countries 
wherein the civil government tolerates such societies ; the excommunication 
launched by the council of Trent and by Roman Pontiffs against parties 
invading or seizing on the rights or possessions of the Church is based on 
a confounding of the spiritual with the temporal and political order of things 
and is intended only for temporal aggrandizement ; the Church should 
make no law binding the consciences of the faithful in regard to UK use 
of temporal things ; the Church has no right to inflict temporal punish- 
jnent on those who transgress her laws ;-~it is in conformity with the 
principles of theology and common law for the state to claim and assert 
its proprietorship of the goods held in possession by churches, religious 
communities, and ether pious and charitable institutes. 

9. The ecclesiastical is not by divine right distinct from, and independent 
of, the civil power, nor could such distinction and independence be main- 
tained without having the Church invade and usurp the essential rights of 
the State. 

10. One can, without sin or any lack of Catholic faith, refuse assent and 
obedience to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See which 
have expressly for their object the general welfare of the Church, or her 
rights, provided only those decrees do not deal with matters of faith 
or morals. Konings, Theol. Mor. Ed. v. p. xlvii. 

Ideals rule the world. All^ men are striving after some ideal. 
If that be a will-o-the-wi?p, they are but working in the wrong 
direction. The Syllabus points out the false lights. In Faust, 
Goethe eloquently depicted the utter misery of man without faith 
or guidance from above ; striving, ever striving after an ideal 
set up by unaided reason, and ending, as such striving mu>t 
invariably, in disappointment, gloom, horror. The Christian ideal 
is not that of the world around us. But after the Christian 
ideal it is ours to strive. " Quid prodest homini si mundum 
universum, etc.'* That sentence in the Holy Book expresses the 
Christian ideal. All things else, politics, schools, churches, 
societies, are subordinate to the Christian ideal. They are only 
means to an end, and are good, not in themselves, but only 
as they serve to lift us up to our ideal. 

Beyond all question the letter Quanta Cura and the Syllabus 
were ex-Cathedra teaching. Even to the stoutest of that ex- 
tinct sect, the Gallicans, not a loophole was left, when the 
hundreds of bishops fiom all quarters of the world, who gathered 
to Rome in 1867, in the most solemn manner, collectively, as 
they had before individually, professed their adhesion to the 
documents. Of the Syllabus we may therefore say, Haec est 


fides Catholica quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque ser- 
vaverit, absque dubio in seternum peribit. 

In his reply to the magnificent address of the assembled 
prelates, the Holy Father thus expresses himself : 

" VENERABILES FRATRES ! Perjucunda quidem licet a fide et 
devotione vestra prorsus expectanda, nobis fuerat nobilis ilia 
concordia, qua, sejuncti ac dissiti, eadem tenere, eadem asserere 
profitebamini, quae nos docueramus ; et eosdem, quos damna- 
veramus, errores in religiosae civilisque societatis exitium invectos 
execrari. Verum multo jucundius nobis fuit haec ipsa discere 
ex ore vestro et nunc rursum a congregatis vobis explicatius 
et solemnius accipere." 

It is the privilege of the children of the Church to be thus 
infallibly taught. As dealers in the precious metals can detect 
the genuine from the spurious by the application of a certain 
acid, so can we in the matters relating to philosophy, theology, 
and social laws, detect the false by comparing the theses or 
conclusions with the propositions of the Syllabus. Temperate, 
respectful discussion of these propositions among clergymen, it 
is suggested, cannot fail to ground us more solidly in philo- 
sophy, to sharpen our intellects, and furnish ready answers to 
the absurd philosophical balderdash with which we are, East and 
West, deluged in these latter days. 


Among the faculties of our bishops is this: "Declarandi 
privilegiatum in qualibet ecciesia suas dicecesis unum altare, dum- 
modo aliud privilegiatum non adsit, pro cunctis missae sacrificiis, 
quae in eodem altari celebrabuntur a quocumque presbytero saec- 
ulari vel cujusvis Ordinis regulari." Facultates Extraordinary, 
C. n. 8. 

All rectors in the United States can have one altar in their 
church privileged for all time. But the altar should be fixed. 
An altar is fixed, sensu canonico, when the structure, whether 
of stone or wood, is attached immovably to the church wall 
or floor.. The altar stone set into it may be movable. Such an 
altar would not be susceptible of consecration. It would not be 
fixed sensu liturgico. (THE PASTOR Vol. III. p. 17.) In a re- 


script to the Oblates of Mary, granting the privilege of the altar 
for all their churches, dated March 26, 1867, the following words 
occur: " Ne autem dubium circa qualitatem altaris fixi exoriatur, 
Sanctitas Sua edixit et declaravit sufficere, ad constituendam 
qualitatem altaris fixi, ut in medio altaris stabilis et immovibilis, 
licet non consecrati, lapis consecratus etiam amovibilis ponatur." 

[Even this manner of fixity is not required for gaining the 
indulgence of the altar Monday or Tuesday in virtue of Fac. 
n. 20 Form I.] 

If the consecrated stone be removed from an altar so fixed 
and indulgenced and another substituted, the altar does not lo?e 
its privilege: 


An indulgentia seu privilegium Is the indulgence or privilege of 

altaris a Sancta Sede concessum sit the altar granted by the Holy See 

lapidi consecrate, plerumque portatili to the altar stone itself which is 

in quacumqne ecclesia, et cuicumque generally movable and can be taken 

altari fixo imposito, an vero deter- from one altar to another? or is it 

minato altari fixo, quod proinde alio granted to the fixed and designated 

consecrato lapide imposito privilegium altar structure, which would not 

minime amitteret? Sacra Congrega- therefore lose the privilege if the 

tio die 27 Septembris 1843 respon- altar stone were removed and another 

dit : substituted? 

Negative, quoad priniam partem; R. No, to the first part ; yes, to the 

Affirmative, quoad secundam : videli- second. The privilege in question is, 

cet privilegium altaris, de quo supra, granted to a designated altar dedicated 

datum est altari determinate, et in hon- to, and in honor of , some saint. Deer. 

orem alicujus sancti specialiter dicato. Auth. 324. 

Our bishops receive their faculties, for a given period, at 
present, ad quinquennium. The question was raised at one 
time, as to whether they could, in virtue of this faculty, n. 8 
Form C., privilege an altar in perpetuum, or whether the privi- 
lege should be renewed after each renewal of the Faculties. 

The question was proposed to Rome by the late F. Konings, 


An altare quod ab episcopo vi n. 8 facultatum extraordinaria- 
rum C. privilegiatum declarari potest, censendum privilegiatum 
perpetuum ? 

Resp. S. R. U. I. Affirmative. See Kon ing's Commentarium in 
Fac. Ap. p. 153 seq. inter Responsa Romana. 


In proof of the privilege, as well as to remind priests about 
to celebrate of the fact, a notice, naming the altar privileged, 
should be placed in the sacristy, where it would catch the eye. 

It would be more desirable to form the intention of gaining 
the privilege of the altar for some soul, but it does not 
seem to be a necessary condition, at least if the mass be said 
for only one soul : 

Utrum missa celebrata ad altare Is mass, said on a privileged altar, 
privilegiatum sit per se privilegiata, privileged by the mere fact of its 
vel necesse sit, ut vel offerens being celebrated on that altar, or 
eleemosynam vel sacerdos intendat is it necessary for the donor of the 
applicare privilegium ? offering, or the priest, to intend the 

Resp. S. Cong. Affirmative, ad application ? 

primam parlem ; Negative, ad secundam. R. Yes, to the first part ; No, to 
(366). the second. March 12, 1855. 


There remains, however, a valid reason for having the notice 
conspicuous in the sacristy, namely, to have mass in black when 
the rubrics permit. The indulgence would not be gained by a 
votive, or by a mass of a semi-double. And even if the priest be 
celebrating pro vivis, there exists in our opinion sufficient cause 
for saying the requiem mass when the rubrics permit with applica- 
tion for the living, in order to place the necessary condition for 
obtaining the indulgence of the altar for a soul in purgatory. 
It would seem that, according to decree 348, (Vol IV. p. 206) 
the fructus specialis of the mass can be applied for the inten- 
tion required, and the plenary indulgence be offered for a soul in 
purgatory, if this be not expressly excluded by the terms of the 
privilege. "Si autem de applicanda missa nihil dicitur, (in indul- 
to) ex opin.ione consultoris S. Indulg. Congregationis privilegium 
akaris ita est ab applicatione misuse separable, ut missa uni, alteri 
altaris privilegium, applicari possit. Quare in illo casu non vide- 
tur altaris privilegio obstare, quominus etiam pro vivis ad certam 
intentionem, (sive pro stipendio, sive aliter, ) missa applicetur. 
Haec enim applicatio minime impedit, quominus in missa et per 
earn simul orari possit pro defuncto, atque ei ex thesauro Eccle- 
siae per dispensationem Summi Pontificis plenaria indulgentia 
applicari. Hoc sensu videtur sumendum esse privilegium altaris, 
quod quotidie lucrari potest sacerdos, qui actum heroicum, ;*. e. 
cessionem omnium satisfactionum, pro defunctis fecit. Quum ibi 
enim in concessione quotidiani privilegii altaris (Pius IX. 30 


Sept. 1852.) applicationis missae pro defuncto vel defunctis mentio 
non fiat, lata interpretatio locum habet, neque applicatio pro 
aliis, sive defunctis sive vivis, excludi debet, modo, si per rubri- 
cas nihil obstat, missa de Requiem dicatur, quam ex rationabili 
causa etiamtum celebrari licet, quando applicatio facienda PS;; 
pro vivis." Ita, Lehmkuhl, II. 557. "Plerumque tamen missae 
applicatio requiritur," subdit. 

Die 1 6 Novembris 1711, Sacra Congregatio mandavit quod in 
posterum non recipiantur onera perpetua pro allaribus privikgiaiis, 
et quod non rtcipianlur missat adventitice prceter numerum cui com- 
mode satisfieri possit. Deer. Authentica n. 41. 


and by Apostolic dispensation 

Beloved Son, Health and Apostolic Benedicfwn ! 

What our Venerable Brethren, the Bishops of North America, 
assembled in the last Council of Baltimore, in the year 1884, 
proposed concerning the establishment of a University in your 
Republic, We learn from your joint letter of October 25th, of 
last year that yourself and the other Bishops of the United States 
are now anxious to put into practical effect. And We have been 
especially rejoiced by this admirable manifestation of your faith, 
and by the sincere homage of your affection towards this Apostolic 
See, to whose patronage and care you have commended the 
University from its very first beginings. For it has ever been 
the glory of the Pastors of the Church, and especially of her 
Supreme Pontiffs, earnestly to promote true knowledge, and 
studiously to provide that in her schools the sciences, and 
especially those of theology and philosophy, should be taught in 
conformity with divine faith, so that the forces of revelation 

1 Official Ttanslation, Vide supra p. 28. 


and reason combined should form an invincible bulwark of faith. 
Hence Our Predecessors, always ardently solicitous for the 
education of Christian people in the past, spared no pains nor 
labor to found in the principal cities of Europe those celebrated 
institutions of learning, that is to say, those Universities which, 
in the middle ages and in the centuries following, enriched 
Church and State with multitudes of men of learning. For this 
same end, from the moment that the government of the Church 
was committed to Us, We have labored assiduously for the 
revival of learning, and directed our efforts especially to the 
restoration of the teachings of Saint Thomas and to establish them 
in the place of honor they held in the past; with this aim in 
view that, in the cultivation of the more important studies, 
while full account should be taken of all the results which the 
industry of learned men has skilfully and wisely attained to in 
recent times, the system of philosophy should be shaped 
according to the noble wisdom of the ancients, and follow with 
docile zeal in the footsteps of the Angelic Doctor. For there 
was no doubt whatever in Our mind that, this revival of the 
sciences once effected, the study, even of letteis and of the other 
branches of human learning, joined with regard for religion, 
would redound greatly to the advantage of civil society. 

The importance of this is made manifest by the dangers to 
which youth is exposed in European countries in our days ; 
and your own acquaintance with the condition of things in North 
America cannot but have convinced you likewise of its very 
grave moment. For the unlimited licence of thought and of 
writing, to which erroneous notions concerning both divine and 
human things have given rise, not only in Europe but also in 
your country, has been the root and source of unbridled 
opinions ; while on the other hand, with religion banished to 
a great extent from the schools, wicked men audaciously strive, 
by the craft of fallacious wisdom, to extinguish the light of 
faith in the minds of the young, and to enkindle therein the 
flames of irreligion. Wherefore it is necessary that youth be 


nourished more carefully with sound doctrine, and that those 
young men especially who are being educated for the Church, 
should be fully aimed to fit them for the task of defending 
Catholic truth. 

We therefore most gladly welcome and heartily approve your 
project for the erection of a University, moved as you are by 
a desire to promote the welfare of all, aivl the interests of your 
illustrious Republic. But in order thai this noble institute may be 
happily established and conducted to ever increasing prosperity, it 
must remain under the authority and protection of all the Bishops 
of the country, in such a w.iy that its whole administration shall 
be directed by them through certain Bishops selected for that 
purpose, zvhose right and duty it shall be to regulate the system of 
study, to make rules of discipline, to select the professors and other 
officials of the University, and to ordain whatever else perlains to 
its best government. And it is fitting that whattver shall be 
established concerning all these things be presented to this Apostolic 
See for its approval. But as to the choice of the city in which 
the University is to be erected, We desire that counsel be 
taken with all the Bishops of the United States, and that the 
question be decided after the opinion of all has been asked. 

Go on, therefore, Beloved Son, together with all Our other 
Venerable Brethren, the Bishops of the United States, to carry 
to perfection \\ith one mind what you have begun ; and let 
not any one of you be deterred by any difficulty or labor, but 
let all take courage from the assured hope that they will 
receive an abundant return for their cares and solicitudes, 
having laid the foundations of an institute destined to provide 
the Church with worthy ministers for the salvation of souls and 
the propagation of Religion, and to give to the Republic her 
best citizens. And We earnestly beseech Almighty God, that He 
would send forth upon you Wisdom that sitteth by His throne, 
that she may direct the minds and hearts of you all ; and as a 
pledge of the divine gifts, and a mark of Our good will, We 
most lovingly bestow upon you, Our Beloved Son, and upon all 


Our Venerable Brethren, the Archbishops and Bishops of the 
United States, and upon all others who will aid you in this 
work by their liberality, the Apostolic Benediction. 

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, this icth day of April, 1887, 
in the tenth year of Our Pontificate. 





ROMANA. Occasionem nactus E.mus et R.mus D.nus Cardinalis Lucidus 
Maria Parocchi, Sanctissimi Domini Nostri LEONIS PAP^E XIII in Alma 
Urbe Vicarius, centenarise octavre commemorationis, die XVI mox adveni- 
entis mensis Octobris solemniter recolendoe, gloriosi obitus Beati Victoris 
III Papse et Confessoris, qui penes inclytum Ordinem Sancti Benedicti 
Congregaiionis Cassinensis legitimo cultu jam gaudet, Sanctissimum eumdem 
Dominum Nostrum supplicibus votis rogavit, ut Romano Clero tarn Ssecu- 
lari quam Regular! aliisque Kalendario Romano utentibus, quotannis die! 
XVI Octobris sub ritu duplici minori Festum recoli valeat eiusdem Beati 
Pontificis cum Officio ct Missa, uti in superior! exemplar! a Sacra 'Rituum 
Congregatione approbatis ; ac praeterea, ut hoc vertente anno idem Festum 
sub ritu duplici secundae classis ab eodem utroque Clero Romano cele- 
bretur, translata ad primam diem non impeditam Puritatis Deiparae festi- 
vitate, in illam diem incidente. Sanctitas porro Sua in omnibus benigne 
annuere dignata est juxta preces, servatis Rubricis : et super his praesens 
ipsius Sacrae Rituum Congregationis Decretum expediri mandavit. Contrariis 
non obstantibus quibuscumque. Die 23 Julii 887. 

Pro ac D. no. Card. D. BARTOLINI S. R .C. Prtrfecto 

Loco iff Sigilli 

LAURENTIUS SALVATI S. I?. C. Secretarius. 

Tha new office granted for St. Victor III. is : Omnia de 
communi Conf. Pent, primo loco, with special prayer and special 
lessons for secoud nocturn. 

The mass is Staluit with the prayer as in office, and special 
secret and postcommunion. 

It is to be hoped the lessons and prayers will be printed, 
so that the leaf can be inserted in missal and breviary, 



"Cum Ecclesiae lege, scripta ad religionem et Dei cultum spee- 
tantia, sine approbatione ordinarii prselo committi vetentur, mo- 
neantur illi, quorum interest, auctores nempe librorum et typo- 
graphi in hac dicecesi libros edentes, ut licentiam nostram in casibus 
ccurrentibus prius impetrent. Optamus praeterea ut clerici 
nullum prorsus opus, etiam de religione non tractans, suo nomine 
edant, quin prius consensum nostrum exquirent." . 10. Synodus 
Neo-Eboracen. V. 

The ' Ecclesiae lex " referred to are the Ten Rules adopted by 
the Council of Trent, (THE PASTOR, Vol. III., p. 211,) supple- 
mented and interpreted by the Observationes and Instructio of 
Clement VIII., ( Ib. p. 241, seq. : } the Constitution of Benedict 
XIV., Solh'cita ac provida, (Ib. p. 289,) the Detreta prefixed by 
authority to the official Roman publication, entitled Index Libro- 
rum Prohibiioriim, (THE PASTOR, Vol. III., p. 327, seg.,) the 
Mandatum (1825) of Leo XII., and the Moniium of the Sacred 
Congregation, (Ib. p. 334,) the Additio novissima by Pius IX., 
(Ib. p. 335) and finally the sweeping modification of all preced- 
ing legislation on this subject decreed by the same Pontiff in 1848, 
(Ib. p. 337.) 

In this latter document, the reason assigned by the Pontiff for 
the abolition in great part of the legislation of earlier periods, was 
the utter impossibility of carrying out that legislation. 

So numerous are the publications that no diocese could furnish 
the staff of men that would be required, and be, at the same time, 
competent, to examine them. 

A single censor librorum would not suffice in a diocese. "It is 
a rule/' declares Benedict XIV. in Const. Sollicita, "It is a rule 
made by the Congregation itself, never to condemn a Catholic au- 
thor on the report of any single consultor." (Vol. III. p. 292.) 

"As the good name of an author may be indirectly affected by 
the condemnation of his book, in the case of illustrious Catholic 
writers, the author shall be heard in defence of his book, prior 
to its condemnation." Ib. 

" If, by any chance, a book be given a man to examine which 
treats of a subject in which he is not himself especially proficient, 
and he undertake to pass upon it, such a one cannot be held 
guiltless before God or man." ' Const. Solliciia, 26. Of 

*) Ad referendum de aliquo libro ii soli admittentur, qui scientiam rerum, quas 


course no individual in any diocese is so blind as to fancy 
himself^ competent to pass upon a book on any conceivable 
subject. Nor is anything so absurd expected of the official ap- 
pointed in some dioceses called the censor iibrcrum. 

In all cases the episcopal Imprimatur must be given gratis and 
without needless delay. "Therefore we decree that, in future, no 
one shall presume to print or get printed any book, unless after 
being carefully examined by the ordinary of the place, or by some 
one specially skilled in the particular subject of the book deputed 
by the ordinary, it be approved by their signatures. These signatures 
shall be given gratis, (not the ordinary's only, but the examiner's) 
and likewise, without unnecessary delay." Leo X., Const. Inkr 
sollicitudines. (THE PASTOR, III., p. 214.) 

Again: "Before publication, in the City of Rome all MSS. 
must be examined by the Card. Vicar or persons deputed by his 
Holiness : in other places, by the bishop or persons appointed by 
him. When the book is not objectionable, leave to print shall be 
granted in writing, gratis, and without delay/' 

Not a diocese in the United States, and we doubt if any in the 
world at the great centres at which nearly all printing is done in 
modern times, could afford to pay the staff of scholars it would be 
necessary to keep on hand were the supposed "Ecclesiae lex " De libris 
approbandis ei prohibendis attempted to be carried out. The gratis 
clause, referring as it does not to the bishop only, but more especially 
to those charged with the examination of the manuscripts, and forbid- 
ding them, quovis titulo, to accept anything, from either publisher 
or author, for the time and labor bestowed on the work, this clause, 
insisted upon ever by the Holy See, makes a general censorship of 
all publications impossible here as elsewhere. The censors are 
not employed by publisher or author. They are, by the curia, and 
to be remunerated by the curia. It would be manifestly contrary 
to public policy to permit them to accept anything, even in the 
way of a gift, for their decision, either from author or publisher. 
The strictest impartiality is required in them. Hence, " those 
who have the appointing of the censor for a book, shall see 

libri delati respective continent, diuturno studio acquisitam possideant; decet 
enim de artibus solos artifices judicare : nihilominus si forte eveniat, ut alicui 
per errorein materia aliqua discutienda committatur, ab illius peculiaribus studiis 
aliena, idque a censore electo deprehendatur ; noverit is se neque apud Detrm 
neque apud homines culpa vacaturum nisi quamprimum id aperiat, seque ad 
ferendam de ejusmodi libri censuiam minus aptum professus alium magis idone- 
um ad id muneris subrogari caret. 


that no particular friend or relative of author or printer be 
deputed to examine it, nor, on the other hand, any person pre- 
judiced against the author." Alexander VIII. (THE PASTOR, 
III., p. 242.) 

In nearly every number of the foreign periodicals that come 
to hand, report is made of books condemned by the S. Con- 
gregation of the Index. We cannot call to mind a single case 
in which the lack of the Imprimatur was alleged as a reason 
for the condemnation, unless in the case of books of which the 
Church assumes to be herself the author. These are the Holy 
Scriptures, Breviary, Missal, Ritual, Ceremonial of Bishops, and 
Pontifical, to which may be added the Gradual, and, if the bishop 
see fit, prayer books. 

By special law another class of writings cannot be printed 
without the express authorization of the Master of the Apostolic 
Palace : 


Sacra Rituum Congregatio causarum beatificationis servorum Dei 
et canonizationis beatorum, quae ejus examini proponuntur sum- 
mam gravitatem perpendens, sui muneris esse duxit ilia praecavere 
pericula, qua? ex inconsulta evulgatione eorumdem servorum Dei 
rerum gestarum, ac judicialium desuper disquisitionum, luctuosis- 
simis hisce temporibus, facile oriri possent. Perpensis itaque 
accurate decretis sa. me. Alexandri Papas VII diei 19 et 23 Julii 
anni 1661, statuendum censuit, ut, firma lege nullibi extra Urbem 
inprimendi quaelibet ejusmodi scripta, in Urbe ipsa, durantibus 
praedictis rerum publicarum conditionibus, vel donee aliter a 
Sede Apostolica provisum fuerit, eadem nonnisi a typographis 
imprimi valeant, qui ab ofncio et auctoritate Patris S. Palatii 
Apostolici Magistri rite dependent ab eoque approbati habentur. 
Si secus quaelibet e praefatis scripturis praelo excusa fuerit, tanquam 
irrita prorsus ac nulla a S. Congregation is ofncialibus haberi debeat. 
Et ita declaravit ac statuit, die 30 Januarii 1878. 

Facta autem de praemissis Sanctissimo Domino Nostro Leoni 
Papas XIII. per me infrascriptum secretarium fideli relatione, idem 
SS. Dominus Noster decretum S, R. C. praefatum approbavit, et 
ita in posterum servari mandavit. Contrariis non obstantibus 
quibuscumque. Die 7 Martii anni ejusdem. 


S. R. C. Prceftcius. 


Special laws also govern litanies. See THE PASTOR I. 47 and 

Benedict XIV. inserted the following in the laws of the 
Index: " Litaniae omnes, praeter antiquissimas et communes, 
quae in Brevianis, Missalibus, Pontificalibus ac Ritualibus con- 
tinentur et praeter litanias de B. Virgine quae in sacra ^de 
Lauretana decantari solent prohibentur." 

Pius IX. mitigated the severity of this prohibition by a de- 
cree of April 1 8, 1860. The foregoing was altered to read 
Litaniae omnes. . . .quae decantari solent, non edantur sine re- 
visione et approbatione ordinarii, nee publice in ecclesiis, 
publicis oratoriis, et processionibus recitentur absque licentia et 
approbatione Sacrorum Rituum Congregationis. 

Next was published June 16, 1880 the Monitum of the 
Sacred Congregation of Rites in regard to litanies : 

Although no litanies but those of the Holy Name of the Blessed Virgin 
Mary, commonly styled of Loretto, and the Litanies of the Saints which 
are found in the Liturgy, have been approved by the Holy See, others 
are published, nevertheless, to be recited by the faithful in honor of some 
saint or mystery, and are found in books of piety, especially in those 
generally known as books of devotion books sometimes issued with the 
sanction of ecclesiastical authority. Hence the Sacred Congregation of Rites 
deems it its duty to admonish Ordinaries not to allow the public recitation 
of other litanies besides those mentioned, and any which the Holy Office 
may hereafter acknowledge and approve ; aud they should likewise take 
care not to give their approbation to books in which litanies destitute of 
Apostolical sanction are inserted. 

This Monitum created no little anxiety in some quarters, to 
allay which and explain the matter more fully Cardinal Bar- 
tolini's letter of Oct. 29, 1882 was published : 

MOST REV. LORD AND BROTHER: Explaining that the decisions of the 
Holy See in regard to the approbation of liianies by the Ordinaries, and 
especially the Monitum of the l6th of June, 1880, are understood in va- 
rious and different ways, your Lordship has requested this Sacred Congre- 
gation to give an authentic interpretation thereof. This Sacred Congregation 
then, having accurately examined the questions proposed, judged proper to 
reply to all by the following single response: The Monitum referred to ap- 
plies to the litanies to be used in liturgical and public functions ; but as 
to other litanies or new ones, not only may they, but the Ordinaries ought 
to examine them and approve them if expedient ; but this only for private 
and extra-liturgical use. 

While transmitting in my official capacity this response to your Lordship, 
I wish you from my heart every happiness. 

D. CARD. BARTOLINI, S. R. C., Prefect. 
LAURENTIUS S. R. C., Secretary. 


Some few years ago a bishop of France stated to the S. Con- 
gregation of Rites that the edition of the Breviary in general 
use in his diocese was published by some oversight without the 
Imprimatur, adding that it would be a grievous burden on his 
impoverished clergy to be compelled to discard the breviary they 
had purchased and paid for in good faith and procure them- 
selves a copy of some authorized edition. Besides, the loss of 
the copies on hand would be a very serious one to the Cath- 
olic publisher, who had invested heavily in the work and pub- 
lished it in good faith and with the best intentions. The 
decision of the S. Congregation was that it is unlawful to 
use a breviary unless the ordinary of the place in which it is 
printed attest over his own signature that the edition is a faith- 
ful reprint of the normal edition editio typica : however, owing 
to the good faith of publisher and purchasers in that particular 
case, the bishop was directed to get the edition compared with 
the normal one as speedily as possible, and, pending the examin- 
ation, while no more sales of the book or purchases could 
be made, the priests who were already using the edition could 
continue to do so. If the edition were found to be an exact 
reprint, the bishop was to grant the Imprimatur, which should ap- 
pear in the front of every copy thenceforward sold. 

That breviary was declared unlawful on the sole ground of 
its being printed without the Imprimatur. But no book other 
than one of the class -mentioned above is forbidden for that 

A very strong case in point is furnished by the learned 
Editor of the Ada Sanclce Sedis. There is no such fool of a 
Catholic in the wide, wide world, who knows anything of the 
Ada and its editor, Mgr. Pennachi, and does not know that 
of all men in the Church to-day Pennachi, the writer and com- 
mentator and publisher, is the very best authority as to the 
practical binding force, at the present time, of the laws of the 
Index and the need of the episcopal Imprimatur. 

The usual Imprimatur is given to the Acta. A few years 
ago (1883. The Pastor ii. 154,) Pennachi had prepared a 
disquisition on Craniotomy. It was to be inserted in the Acta 
Sandce Sedis and would, of course, be covered with the Impri- 
matur which appears at the end of each volume. We can 
now let the author speak. He writes : " It was our purpose 
to publish this exposition in -the periodical Ada Sanctce Sedis, 


as we had promised our readers. But when on the point of 
doing so, we were reminded by the Rt. Rev. Father, the Master 
of the Apostolic Palace, that, since this question (of craniotomy) 
had been submitted for study and investigation to some chosen 
men, it would not be prudent to publish it in the Ada; and 
for the same reason he would refrain from giving the customary 
Imprimatur, lest any one should think that by cur conclusions, 
supported by his Imprimatur, we wished to forestall the Apostolic 
judgment. Hence this disquisition is published in a brochure 

The essay, notwithstanding it was pointedly and positively 
refused the Imprimatur, was published without let or hindrance 
by Pennachi " ex typographia polyglotta S. C. de Propaganda 
Fide, 1883." For the publication, Pennachi incurred neither 
blame, censure, nor reproof of any kind. He knew that the 
ecclesiastical law, as at present in force, does not forbid such 
dissertations as his de Abortu et Embryotomia to be published 
without the episcopal Imprimatur. 

By the law of chanty all are bound to succor a neighbor in 
distress or danger, whether physical or moral. All are bound, 
then, to a greater or less degree, to prevent the sale and circula- 
tion of books, pamphlets, papers that have a demoralizing ten- 
dency. They are bound to keep such publications from the 
individual or from the community that they would be likely to 
injure. Rectors of churches and confessors are constantly pro- 
scribing books. They are ever striving to withdraw their flocks 
and penitents from that pestiferous reading which is caught up 
with such avidity by a debased society. And they are bound to 
do so ex officio. A book may be good in se, may even have 
the Imprimatur of the ordinary, yet, if the circulation of the 
book in a certain parish, owing to peculiar local circumstances, 
would produce injurious results, the rector, heedless of the 
Imprimatur, would be obliged ex officio to keep the book out 
of his parish. Hence, for condemnation, the book is not con- 
sidered merely as to its contents in se but as to its probable 
effects. The men who claim that a book is not to be condemned 
if it contains nothing against faith or morals, only betray their 
utter ignorance of the subject, A translation of St. Liguori's 
Moral Theology would inculcate nothing contrary to faith 01 
morals. But he would be a queer rector who would allow 
such a work to circulate in his parish without forbidding its read- 


ing, and denouncing the book as unfit to be kept in a Catholic 
house. No bishop would give such a publication his Imprimatur, 
and no bishop would allow a copy of the work into his diocese 
if it were in his power to keep it out. 

The rector for his parish, the ordinary for priest and people, 
is, each, the best judge of what books or reading would prove 
dangerous, and each the best judge of the probable utility or 
futility of publicly proscribing such publications. If it seem to 
them that the proscription will avail anything, they are bound, 
ex officio, to proscribe. If the public denunciation would avail 
nothing, nothing remains for them but to be silent. The 
publicity given to a book by a public denunciation will often 
only add to its power for mischief. 

While the motive for denunciation be precisely the same in 
the rector's case and the bishop's, the latter's prohibition of the 
book is binding in foro externo el interno. Its violation, therefore, 
is in all cases sinful, whereas the rector's warning may be neglected 
by those to whom the book could be no source of danger. 

Technical treatises or works, say, on Theology, Liturgy, Canon 
Law, etc., have no need of a preliminary Imprimatur. As a rule 
they can do no harm, and if any danger lurk in their pages, 
it is soon dragged to light by their readers. The book is thrown 
aside as unreliable. Author and publisher take the hint and do 
better afterwards. The presence or absence of the episcopal 
Imprimatur makes no appreciable difference in the sale of such 
a. book. The Imprimatur does not commit the ordinary to the 
author's views or opinions. It is in no sense an approbation. 
The bishop may proscribe a book bearing his own Imprimatur, 
as the Pope did in legard to the works of Hermes. With or 
without the Imprimatur, the book carries with it just that weight 
of authority which the author's individual learning, caution, and 
experience confers. no more. The Imprimatur may be a bit of 
a feather in an author's cap, but it is only ornamental. 


An episcopi nomen dicendum sit In the Canon of the Mass, and 
in Canone missce, et in aliis liturgicis other liturg'cal prayers, should the 
orationibus a die notitise, etiamsi non name of a bishop-elect be mentioned 
officialiter habitae electionis ejusdem from the time certain, though unof- 
in Consistorio, vel a die captse ficial, news of his appointment has 
possessionis ecclesise, cui a Summo been received, or should his name 
Pontifice praepositus full ? not be mentioned until after taking 

possession of his see ? 

Resp. : A die captas possessionis R. Not till after taking possession 
vel per episcopum ipsum vel per of his see, whether in person or 
suum procuratorem. Die 4, Julii 1879. through a procurator. A eta, xii. 96. 

"Opto magis senlire compundionem quam scire ejus definitionem. " a Kempis. 


JANUARY, 1888. 

No. 3. 


Ex MISSALI ROMANO. ''After Terce and the usual asperges, 
the priest, in violet cope or without the chasuble, begins the 
blessing of branches of palm, olive, or other trees, placed 

either in front of the altar or at the Epistle corner/' Rubric. 

The prayer with which the ceremony opens gives the keynote of 
the joyousness of the day: "O God, whom only to love and 
look up to is holiness, multiply in us the gifts of Thv inde- 
scribable grace: and do Thou, who, through the death of Thy Son, 
hast given us to hope for the things we believe in, grant us 
through His resurrection to reach the goal we are working for : 
through Him who with Thee liveth and reigneth, etc." 

The anticipated resurrection and its AT. its makes the Church 
rejoice and cry Hosanna on the eve of the Passion, and, addres- 
sing God the Father, exclaim, " qui gloriaris in consilio sanctorum 
tuorum. Tibi enim serviunt creaturae tuae. . . et benedicunt te 
sancti tui. Quia illud magnum Unigeniti tui nomen coram regi- 
bus et potestatibus hujus sseculi libera voce confitentur." Preface 
of the Blessing. By anticipation the Church is already rejoicing 
in the assured triumph of the resurrection which shall make his 
Name great among the gentiles, and at mention of which every 
knee shall bow. 

Palm Sunday with its procession is celebrated in commemora- 
tion of our Lord's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In the 
Gospel of the Blessing the circumstances are thus narrated by 
St. Matthew: " Et adduxerunt asinam et pullum; et imposuerunt 
super eos vestimenta sua et eum desuper sedere fecerunt. Plu- 
rima autem turba straverunt vestimenta sua in via: alii autem 
caedebant rainos de arboribus et sternebant in via : turbae au- 
tem quae praecedebant et quaa sequebantur, clamabant dicentes: 
Hosanna filio David: benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini." 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1887. All rights reserved. 


The mention of branches of palms or olives (palmites palma- 
rum seu olivarum) in the next prayer, and the mention of 
olive only in the subsequent one, (ut hanc creaturam olivae, quam 
columba rediens ad arcam proprio pertulit ore,) together with 
the reference to the dove returning to the ark "carrying a 
bough of an olive tree with green leaves," (Gen. viii. 
ii.) clearly indicate that the dominant idea is not a branch of 
the palm, the olive, the box or the fir tree specifically, but 
green boughs, or branches of any tree. In the bough with 
green leaves brought back to the ark, there was no special sig- 
nificance to Noah, because it was a bough from an olive 
tree. The only significance it had to the Patriarch was that 
"Noah therefore understood that the waters were ceased up- 
on the earth." (Gen. 1. c.) Perceiving from the bough brought 
to the ark, having on it green leaves, that vegetation was al- 
ready well advanced, he knew that the water under which every 
tree lay buried must have been carried off a good while pre- 
viously. The bough of any other leafy tree would have had 
the same meaning to Noah. In this prayer there is not a word 
at all of palms, just as there is not in the gospel of the ser- 
vice taken from St. Matthew : " Alii autem caede'bant rallies 
de arboribllS et sternebant in via." 

It is evident that the words palmae et olivae, though specifi- 
cally mentioned, are used by a figure of speech in the generic 
sense of green trees, and this is not ours but the official inter- 
pretation of the Church. For, while we are to use these words 
in the Blessing palmae et olivae where they occur, we are told 
by the introductory rubric that we may be applying them indiffer- 
ently to the branches of genuine palm or olive trees, or with 
equal propriety to the branches of any other trees: "Sacerdos 
indutus pluviali procedit ad benedicendum ramos palmarum et 
olivarum sive aliarum arborum." Now, as the celebrant 
is not allowed to alter the words of the missal, it is plain that, 
when he says over branches "of other trees:" " Benedic eliam 
hos ramos palmce et oliva " the latter words must be used, and are 
interpreted by the Church as used, not in their specific sense, 
but in a genuine one, equivalent to green branches. Any 
one that cannot see the force of this argument we can only 
recommend to St. Joseph, the Patron of " Hopeless Cases." 

The third prayer of the Blessing is a beautiful one, but, for 
our purpose, it will be enough to quote a few words : " Deus 


qui dispersa congregas et congregata conservas, qui populis ob- 
viam Jesu ramos portantibus benedixisti, etc." 

The next prayer is so expressive, we give it entire: " O God, 
who by Thy wondrous arrangement of things, hast been pleased, 
even by inanimate objects, to signify to us the means of salva- 
tion ; grant, we beseech Thee, that the devout hearts of Thy 
faithful may, to their own profit, comprehend the mystic mean- 
ing of the fact we commemorate, namely, that the crowd, moved 
by a supernatural impulse, went forth on this day to meet the 
Redeemer, and strewed his way with branches of palms and 
olives. The palm brandies betoken the triumph over the 
prince of death, while the sappy sprigs of the olive proclaim, as 
it were, that the healing spiritual balsam is at hand. Even 
then, that favored multitude understood that these things were 
prefigured : because our Redeemer, compassionating the miseries 
of mankind, was about to do battle with, and in doing so, triumph 
over, the prince of death. Accordingly the people, in paying 
their homage, made use of symbols which expressed both the 
triumph of victory, and the richness of mercy. And thus we, 
also, holding to the act and the significance of the act, hum- 
bly, in firm faith, beseech Thee, holy Lord, Father omnipotent, 
eternal God, through our Lord, Jesus Christ, that in him and 
through him, of whom Thou hast deigned to make us mem- 
bers, we may reap victory out of death, and merit to have part 
in his glorious resurrection : who, with Thee, liveth and reign- 
eth, etc." 

If we " hold to the act and the significance of the act/' two 
things are to be noted : we must carry branches, symbolic of 
triumph, and the branches must be green and sappy "tit mi- 
sericordicB pinguedinem declararent." Beyond a mere inspection of 
this prayer, no man, not wholly destitute of reason, can fail to 
see that the dried leaves of the cabbage palm, our so-called 
" Real Palms," are as inappropriate for the services of the last 
Sunday of Lent, as would be so much dried sorghum or 
broom-corn. The "Real Palms" are neither branches nor 
boughs nee rami nee palmites, and there is no pretence of 
their possessing any sap or succulence to typify the "miseri- 
cordiae pinguetudo." The use of these things is a flat and 
defiant refusal to follow the plain law of the Church, either in 
letter or spirit. Away with the filthy, meaningless things ! and 
let us have what our fathers had, and what the Church pre- 


scribes, green, sappy sprigs (palmites) or boughs (rami). These 
will express, as intended, both the triumph over death, seen in 
our Lord's resurrection, "triumphus victoriae," and the exu- 
berant outflowing of God's mercy to man, typified in the oily 
sap of the fresh, green branches, " misericordiae pinguetudo." 

We quote from the blessing : 

"Deus, qui per olivae ram urn, pacem terris columbam 
nuntiare jussisti : prsesta quaesumus ; ut hos olivae cetera- 
rumque arborum ramos coelesti benedictione sanctifices : 
ut cuncto populo tuo proficiant ad salutem. Per Christum 
Dominum nostrum." 

The word ramus or palmes is always present. Where God's 
mercy, rather than the triumph of the resurrection, is the 
leading thought, the word palm does not appear, as in this 
prayer, and in that immediately after the Preface, Petimus 
Domim sancte. 

Thus the word palm, to which so much importance is attached 
by our "national priests," is entirely dispensed with, as unne- 
cessary, in several of the rubrical prayers. 

In the next prayer the leading ideas of the ceremony, Christ's 
triumph over death expressed by the branch and God's mercy 
typified by the sap, are again pointedly expressed: " Benedic 
Domine hos palmarum seu olivarum ramos : et praesta ; ut quod 
populus tuus in tui venerationem hodierna die corporaliter agit, 
hoc spiritualiter summa devotione perficiat, de hoste mctoriam re- 
portando et opus misericordice summopere diligendo. Per Dnum, etc." 

The mystic meaning of the whole ceremony is destroyed by the 
substitution of the cabbage-tree leaves, dry and dirty, (or rather 
some yellow strips from the faded leaf,) for the sprig or 
branch, juicy and green, that is required by the rubrics. To such 
superlative humbug, where is the application of the following 
beautiful prayer, with which the blessing of the green branches 
11 palmae seu olivae sive aliarum arborum " concludes : 

" Deus, qui Filium tuum Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum 
pro salute nostra in hunc mundum misisti, ut se humiliaret ad 
nos, et nos revocaret ad te ; cui etiam, dum Jerusalem veniret, 
ut adimpleret Scripturas, crederitium populorum turba, fidelissima 
devotione vestimenta sua cum ramis palmarum in via sterne- 
bant: praesta, quaesumus ; ut, illi fidei viam prjeparemus, de qua, 
remoto lapide oftensionis, et petra scandali, frondeant apud te 
opera nostra justifies ram is, ut (jus vestigia sequi mertamur : Qui 


tecum vivit et regnat, etc/' The telling comparison between the 
Jews, " fidelissima devotione " spreading their garments and 
branches of palms along the path which the Saviour was to pass 
over, and the hope expressed that our good works may shoot 
forth into branches of holiness " frondeant apud te opera nostra 
justitiae ramis" that so, with our branches, the fruits of piety, 
we may be found worthy to follow in the Saviour's footsteps, 
the point of this would be entirely lost unless we carried in our 
hands on Palm Sunday shoots, sprigs, or branches, fresh and green. 
In one word, not a single prayer, net a ceremony in the 
entire function, is by any stretch of interpretation verified of 
the cabbage-tree leaves. Carefully stripped into ribbons as we 
have seen them, those leaves may do well enough for stable 
litter. But they are no more appropriate for use in our churches 
on Palm Sunday than an equal quantity of com husks. In the 
name of common sense, let us have done with them. Sweet 
sappy sprigs or branches of evergreens, fresh and odorous, can 
be had all over the country. These fully respond to the letter 
and spirit of the rubrics; and their use makes the ceremony 
and the prayers intelligible and easy of explanation and illustra- 
tion to the people. The man who would hold up one of the 
cabbage-leaf garter strings, and undertake to explain and illustrate 
therewith the impressive ceremonies of Palm Sunday and the 
accompanying prayers, so pregnant with mystic meaning, might 
begin by addressing his audience in the words of Dogberry: 
" Masters, remember that I am an ass. Oh, that the clerk were 
here to write me down an ass. But though it be not written 
down, yet forget not that I am an ass. And, masters, do not 
forget to specify, when time and place shall serve, that I am 
an ass. " 


The archbishop of Rennes (France), stated to the S. Con- 
gregation of Rites that the mode of anointing the feet in 
Extreme Unction was various in different parts of his diocese, 
some priests anointing the insteps, some the soles of the feet, 
and enquired which was the proper way. 

The Sacred Congregation replied : Nihil innavandum. (4780 
Aug. 27, 1836). 


The reasons assigned in Gardellini for the decision are three : 
i. The Roman Ritual makes no distinction, and whether the 
anointing be on the insteps or soles, the words of the Ritual 
are equally verified. 2. In the various rituals used in France, 
previous to the adoption of the Roman, the one mode or the 
other was prescribed in different editions. This diversity of the 
rituals begot diversity of custom even in places not far apart, 
and even in the same place by successive pastors. 3. The S. 
Congregation is not wont to interfere with established usages by 
formulating new and vexatious laws about trifles, in themselves 
indifferent and contrary to no existing rubric. To avoid scandal, 
complaint and confusion, then, the answer was : Scribendum epis- 
copo esse, ut prudentia adhibita hac in re, nihil innavei. 

Without any reserve, Liguori (711) directs that the feet be 
anointed in plantis. De Herdt : " Pedes inunguntur in supe- 
riori parte, et juxta plures, in plantis." For the former opinion 
he quotes Castaldus, Baruffaldus, Billuart and Dens ; for the 
latter, S. Liguori, St. Charles and Catalani. On this question 
O'Kane is silent. Wapelhorst, in the Compendium Sacra Litur- 
gice recently published, follows De Herdt : " Facienda est unc- 
tio ad pedes in superiori parte, vel in plantis." Schuch, Hand- 
buck der Pastor al-Theologie, refers to the decree above quoted of 
the S. Congregation and says that the diocesan (not the local) 
custom of anointing the feet on the insteps or the soles is 
to be followed. (The decree referred to local, not diocesan 
custom). Benger and Amberger in their Pastoral-Theologies di- 
rect as does Schuch, basing, though incorrectly, their teaching 
on the decree of the Sacred Congregation issued for the arch- 
diocese of Rennes. Scavini: "Pedes, fit unctio ad metatarsum (the 
instep): juxta SS. Carolum et Alphonsum fit in plantis." Sca- 
vini would himself evidently anoint the insteps. A. Carpo, Bib- 
hotheca Liturgica : "Unctio pedum fit in superiori parte vel in 
plantis juxta consuetudinem." Konings : " Sacerdos unctionem 
pedum pro libitu omittere non potest, et fieri debet vel in 
plantis vel supra pedes, prout vel consuetudo fert vel statuta di- 
cecesana praescribunt." Sabetti : "Ad consuetudinem et ad par- 
ticularia locorum statuta attendendum est ut videatur in quanam 
parte facienda sit unctio pedum." Marc: " Ungi debent pedes, 
(vel in plantis vel supra pedes, prout fert consuetudo aut statu- 
ta direcesana praescribunt)." 

We have searched the statutes of several dioceses, but none 


say where the feet should be anointed. If it be proper to 
conform to usage in these matters " ad quam forte ecclesiam 
veneris, ejus mores serva, si cuiquam non vis esse scandalo, aut 
quemquam tibi," (St. Ambrose), whereto are we to look for this 
usage ? At present, nowhere. For there seems to be no- 
where either a. local or diocesan usage established or in 
possession. If there be, the very decree, 4780, though often 
quoted as leaving the matter optional, seems, on the con- 
trary, to deprive individual priests of any choice in the matter. 
Each clergyman, whether rector or assistant, is to go on doing 
precisely as was done before he came to the parish. 

All are agreed that the ordinary, for uniformity's sake, can 
prescribe either one mode or the other, if his doing so is not 
likely to produce scandal, contention, or confusion. No evil 
results need be feared in the U. States. It may be best, how- 
ever, to have one or other form adopted in provincial council, 
rather than in diocesan synod. The adoption of one form or 
the other, either in council or synod, (as would, of course, be 
expressly stated,) would not imply any condemnation of the 
other, or any encroachment on the prerogatives of the Sacred 
Congregation of Rites. 

Without pretending to prophesy, we feel tolerably certain that 
the form inculcated by St. Charles and St. Alphonsus will 
eventually prevail. For, first, this form has already that species 
of approval given to Liguori's Theologia Moralis ; and secondly, 
just as the opinions of Benedict XIV. gradually grew into the 
fixity and authority of indubitable principles, so will it be with 
the opinions of St. Alphonsus, when not clearly disproved. The 
former is the great liturgico-canonist ; and when it is shown 
that this or that opinion was indubitably held by Lambertini, 
few courts will decide to the contrary, few disputants will press 
their own authority or any other against the known view of 
Benedict. Thus, long before the General Decree, dated Aug., 
1868, (5403) was issued, those versed in Liturgy and ac- 
quainted with the guiding principles of the S. Congregation, 
could calmly predict that such a Decree 1 was to come, because 
such was the opinion of Benedict XIV. a They were not 

1 It is that, settling in the affirmative, the controversy as to whether it 
was lawful in missis defunctorum to open the tabernacle and give com- 
munion ex pr&consecratis. 

2 De Sacrifido Missce, lib. iii. Cap. xviii. nn. 10, et seqq. 


disappointed. That other Decree is likewise sure to come, 
namely : When it can be done without any serious inconvenience, the 
soles of the feet, not the insteps, should be anointed. In anticipa- 
tion of the decision of the S. R. C., better follow the very 
highest authority, St. Liguori. In doing so we are certain of 
being right, both in theory and practice. 


A key to the success of religion in the terrible Kullurkamf 
may perhaps be found in those pious " Unions/' formed among 
the priests of many of the German dioceses. We copy the 
regulations of one. These Unions are well worthy of imitation. 
The requirements of the one whose regulations we copy are the 
least that can be required of a priest who wishes to live truly 
as a priest, doing good for himself and for his people. The 
requirement under II. n. 8, may be open to some objection, 
unless satisfactorily explained. The members of a Union need 
not all necessarily belong to the same diocese. As a Union the 
body is not officially recognized, though they have the highest 
approval of the bishops as individuals. Official recognition would 
be only embarrasing and gather into the Union wire-pullers, 
hypocrites, and eye-servers. 


Sacerdotes seculares, qui huic sodalitati se applicant, hoc spectant, ut inter 
se sensus vero sacerdote dignos alant ac nutriant, animum sanctae matri 
Ecclesise devotissimum prse se ferant et foveant, officiis suis religiosissime 
sanctissimeque fungantur. 


Ea quse conantur ut obtineant, sodales Ss. Cordi Jesu se sacrant, in Ss. 
Familise tutelam se conferunt, S. Udalricum et B. Petrum Canisium patronos 
primarios deligunt, obligantes se, excluso tamen peccati onere ,ut fideliter 
haec observent : 

1. Quotidie Matutinum cum Laudibus anticipabunt aut certe ante Missam 

2. Quotidie per quadrantem saltern horse meditationi operam dabunt et 
unum caput Sacra; Scripturse perlegent. 

3. Preparaiionem ante Missam et gratiarum actionem post Missam 
nunquam sine justa causa omittent. 

4. Quotidie Sanctissimum, si fieri potent, visitabunt. 

5. Quotidie inter Missam omnium sodalium et vivorum et mortuorum 


memores erunt, et sexta quaque feria specialem gratiam bene moriendi sibi 
invicem exorabunt. 

6. Quotidie in honorem B. M. V. decadem S. Rosarii pro se invicem 

7. Semel in mense, potissimum feria quinta vel sexta primse hebdomadis, 
per quadrantem saltern horre instituent recollectionem menstruam, i. e., 
omnia qurecunque superiore mense egerint, accuratissime examinabunt ; iidem 
alternis hebdomadibus aut certe singulis mensibus ad S. Sacramentum 
Poenitentiae accedent. 

8. Ut autem ad hrec sacra exercitia assidue tractanda. aut, si quando 
intermiserint, denuo recipienda incitentur, sodales quotidie ration em sibi 
reddent de his omnibus persolutis, perscribendo singula in proprio " libello 
observantiae," quern sexto quoque mense Consiliario tradent. Signa " libelli 
observantiae" ad arbitrium eligi poterunt. 

9. Ad minimum tertio quoque anno exercitia spiritualia subibunt. 


Consiliarius a sodalibus creatur in tres annos ; item eius Vicarius. Con- 
siliarius " hbellos observnntiae" a sodalibus traditos, qua quidem re continuam 
illi societatem suam declarant, accipit acceptosque delet, sempiterno silentio 

Consiliarius suum " libellum observantiae" reddit Vicario. 

In partem curarum externarum Consiliario ejusque Vicario adduntur tres 

Ex his quinque viris constat "Consilium." . 


Sodales inter se omnes amicorum fratrumque loco erunt, obstricti officio 
" correctionis fraternae." 


Singuli sodales vitre sacerdote dign;e studebunt, imprimis cautioni in 
conversatione, sobrietati, castitati : id sedulo agentes, ut exemplo suo, i. e., 
virtute sermoneque pium erga Ecclesiam amorem in fidelium animis rugeant. 


Si quis societatem renuntiare voluerit, en de re Consiiiarium certiorem 

Si " Consilium" gravibus causis impellatur, ut aliquem sodalem excludat, 
id facere non potest nisi prremissa admonitione. 

In starting a " Union '' of this nature, the great archdiocese 
of New York might well lead. 


Besides the two cloistered Orders, St. Francis of Assisi instituted 
a Third Order, of which persons living in the world, married or 
single, could become members. Within recent years there has 


been a happy awakening of devotion towards St. Francis, and es- 
pecially towards the Third Order. Many religious, male and 
female, who had taken vows in canonically erected Institutes or 
in the regular Order, manifested a desire to have their names 
enrolled as members of the third Order. They are forbidden to 
do so. 

Divina charitate ac animarum zelo succensus S. Franciscus Assisiensis 
proeter primum et secundum Ordinem Minorum Claustralium, tertiam quoque 
Ordinem instituit pro personis in sseculo degentibus, ut et ipsae pro sui 
status conditione ad tramitenv consiliorum evangelicorum vitam componerent. 

Innumera vero virtutum ac pietatis monumenta, qure per tot ssecula 
Christifideles in Tertium Ordinem adsciti reliquerunt, nee non recentiu* 
aucta erga Seraphicum Patrem devotio causa fuere, cur etiam religiosorum 
Institutorum sodales eidem Tertio Ordini adscribi expetiverint ; et jam inde 
ab anno 1869, sub die 3 Maji, Ministro general! totius Ordinis Minorum 
tributa est facultas recipiendi in Tertium Ordinem Franciscalem alumnos 
supradictorum Institutorum, eisdem quoque concesso ex Brevi 7 Aprilis 
1876 special! privilegio visitandi ecclesiam vel sacellum proprii Instituti, 
quoties ad lucrandas indulgentias visitanda foret ecclesia primi vel secundi 
Ordinis Seraphici. 

Quamvis autem SSmus Dominus Noster Leo Papa XITI edita Constitu- 
tione Apostolica Misericsrs Del Filius die 30 Maji 1883 ejusdem Tertii 
Ordinis legem novavcrit, attamen quum mini omnino mutatum, immo 
integrum permanere voluerit quod attinet ad prcefati Tertii Ordinis, qui 
srecularis dicitur, naturam, dubium oriebatur, an alumni religiosorum 
Institutorum, quibus singulari Dei munere datum est nuncupatis votis ad 
perfectiorem vitam contendere, amplecti quoque valerent Institutum Tertii 
Ordinis srecularis S. Francisci. 

Quare Emus et Rmus Episcopus Veronensis, instantibus nonnullis e sua 
Ditecesi confessariis, ad omnem in line re hitsitationem e medio tollendam, 
:S. Congregation! Indulgentiarum sequeniia dubia dirimenda proposuit: 

J. Utrum omnes utriusque sexus qui sunt membra alicujus religiosi 
Instituti, vel Congregationis, aut a Summo Puntifice aut ab episcopo 
approbatse, in qua vota emittuntur sive perpetua sive ad tempus, possint 
adscribi in Tertium Ordinem S. Francisci Assisiensis. 

Et quatenus Affirmative: ' 

II. Quibus conditionibus id illis liceat? 

Emi et Rmi Patres responderunt in generalibus Comitiis apud Vaticanur.i 
habitis die 25 Junii 1887: 

Ad I. Negative, facto verbo cum Sanctissimo. 

Ad II. Provisutn in primo. 

Facta vero de iis omnibus relatione in audientia habita ab infrascripto 
Secretario die 16 Junii 1887, Sanctissimus Dominus Noster Leo Papa XIII 
Patrum Cardinalium responsiones ratas habuit et confirmavit. 

Datum ' Romae ex Secretnria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis Sacrisque 
Reliquiis przepositae, die ,16 Julii 1887. 

Fr. Thomas M. Card. Zigliara Prccfectits. 
Alexander Episcopus Oensis Secrclarius, 



Certum est posse et debere baptizari non solum pueros sed 
etiam adultos qui deprehendantur perpttuo amentes fuisse et esse. 

This apples also to children or adults who are half-witted 
or silly and never attain the use of reason. 

These may be baptized unknown to and even against the 
will of parents or guardians. Priests attending public institutions 
would do well to remember. 

But from the fact that baptism could, on strict principles, be 
lawfully conferred, it does not follow that it would be expedient 
to confer it in all cases. Over-zeal and imprudence may occasion 
serious detriment to the cause of religion. The public good 
is to be preferred to private, and over these unbaptized persons 
the church has no jurisdiction. 

The reason why it is unlawful to baptize the children of non- 
Catholics is that to do so would be prejudicial to the natural 
right which the parents possess to bring up and educate their 
own offspring. If the child is baptized this right cannot be al- 
lowed, "ne cum injuria sacramenti parentes filios ad apostasiam 
solicitent." Lehmkuhl, n. 86. 

In Vol. iv., p. 342, a decision of the Holy Office is quoted 
which forbids a priest to baptize a child presented for baptism 
by both parents, Protestants, but with the stipulation that they 
are not to be obliged to rear the child in the Catholic re- 

To make it lawful to baptize a child of non-Catholics invitis 
vel insciis parentibus the Holy Office in 1777 required that the 
child be in Immediate danger of death, "in prsesens vitas dis- 
crimen adduci debere, quocumque tamen modo, qui ob mortis 
periculum baptismo sit expiandus." 

Patrinus unus tantum, sive vir sive mulier, vel ad summum 
unus et una adhibeantur, ex decreto Concilii Tridentini : sed 
simul non admittantur duo viri, aut duae mulieres, neque bap- 
tizandi pater aut mater. 

Hos autem patrinos saltern in setate pubertatis ac sacramento 
confirmationis consignatos esse, maxime convenit. 

Sciant parochi ad hoc munus non esse admittendos infideles 
aut hsBreticos \ non, publice excommunicates aut interdictos; 


non, publice criminosos aut infames; nee qui sana mente non 
sunt, neque qui ignorant rudimenta fidei. 

Ad hoc etiam admitti non debent monachi nee sanctimoniales, 
neque alii cujusvis Ordinis regulares a saeculo segregati. Rituale 
Tit. ir. cap. I. n. 23 seq. 

Can we admit a Protestant as godfather? Can a Catholic act 
as godfather to a child of Protestant parents baptized by their 
preacher ? 

Our answer would be to both questions, No. Father Lehm- 
kuhl writes, n. 71: 

To avoid giving offence, a heretic can be permitted to stand 
for a child, just as a witness, with a Catholic godfather or god- 
mother. Lehmkuhl. 

"St. Alphonsus, together with Laymann, Lacroix, Gobat, and 
others, allows that a Catholic may be godfather to a child of 
heretic parents, even when the baptism is performed by the 
preacher, if it be understood that by so doing the Catholic 
gives no manner of approval to the Protestant rite." This is 
wrong. Such godfather or godmother would be asking of the 
preacher an act which it is not lawful for him to perform, 
and, therefore, not lawful for them to request. 

There exists a decision of the Holy Office, dated May 10, 
1770, which reads : 

Sanctissimus decnvit, Catholicis regular Her non licere hcereticorum. 
aut schismaticorum con:ionibus, baptismis, matrimoniis inter esse. Abso- 
lute autem non licere nee per se nee per altos fungi ojficio patrini 
in baptismis, qucB h&reticorum filiis ab hcereticis ministrantur, Apud 
Scavini, III. n. 230. 

In private baptism, sponsors are not allowed. ' The Sacred 

1 Si tamen adhibentur, certum est contra S. Liguori contsahi cognationem 
spiritualem, ut constat ex declaratione S. Cong. Cone, sub die 5 Martii, 
1678, qure asservatur in archivio ejusdem Congr. Haine, Q. 28. 

This question was one of mere fact. Did the Council of Trent in cap. 
n. De Kef. Malrnnonii wish to include the sponsors at a private bap- 
tism? Only the Congregation of the Council could authoritatively settle 
the point. The express purpose of that ch. ii. was to circumscribe the 
range of relationships. Then it says that the relationship shall reach only 
those " qui baptizatum de sacro fonte recipiunt." From these premises 
many great theologians long argued that the relationship is not contracted 
by sponsors at a private baptism. The contrary is now certain. 

N. An dispositio Concilii (Tridentini) decernens in sacramento baptis- 


Congregation was asked, in 1820, (4752) whether a priest did 
right who baptized a dying child at its home; the priest using a 
violet stole on the occasion and u ing both the oleum calechu- 
menorum and the sacred chrism. The answer was: 

" Juxta votum, nimirum, parochum male se gessisse, baptizando 
cum stola violacea, et liniendo puerum periclitantem extra ec- 
clesiam oleo etiam catechumenorum. In casu enim necessitatis, 
juxta Ritualis prae^criptum, omnia sunt omittenda, quae baptismum 
praecedunt, quaeque postmodum supplenda sunt in ecclesia ad 
quam praesentandus est puer cum convalescit." Die 23 Sept., 1820. 

No promises are made. There is to be no sponsio in the 

case, no sponsors. If the child die, he does not need the 

sponsors; if he live, he should be presented at the font to have 
the omitted ceremonies supplied. 

This rule does not apply to cases in which diocesan statutes 
give priests permission to baptize children at their homes, on 
account, for instance, of distance, or on account of the inclemency 
of the weather during certain months, when the infant could not 
be brought to the church without risking its life. In these 
cases the baptism administered at the house is solemn with 
sponsors and all the ceremonies. 

The missionaries of the Society of the Holy Childhood in 
China and other pagan countries baptize foundlings uncondition- 
ally. They have a moral certainty that the foundling was not 
baptized. In Christian Countries no such certainty can be 
always had, and when it cannot be had, conditional baptism is to 
be administered. Hence "pueri expositi et inventi sub condi- 
tione baptizandi sunt, etiamsi sal sit oppositum, aut schedula 
apud puerum reperta testetur, baptismum ei administratum 
fuisse, nisi persona a qua schedula conscripta sit noscatur et 

matio contrahi cognationem spiritualem inter suscipientem et patrem ac 
matrem suscepti habeat locum in baptismo sine solemn itatibus ob necessita- 
tem domi secrete ? 

Sacra Congregatio censuit : Dilala et scribant theologi. 

Die 29 Maji, 1677. 

A synopsis of the Vota of eight theologians designated to investigate the 
question may be seen in Muhlbauer, Thesaurus Resolutionum, torn. iv. p. 
6 seq. After very mature deliberation the S. Congregatio rendered a defi- 
nite decision the following year: "An dispositio Concilii Tridentini decer- 
nens, etc ? " 

S. Congregatio censuit : Affirmative. Die 5 Martii, 1678. 


fidem mereatur, aut constet aliunde baptismum valide fuisse 
collatum." Staluta dioec. Mechliniensis. 

The diocesan statute is nearly in the identical words of a 
decision of the S. Congr. of the Council dated Jan. 15, 1724: 
Ecce baptizandos in omnibus casibus excepto tamen casu sched- 
ulse, quce habeat certitudinem" The card accompanying the found- 
ling, in order to be trust-worthy, should state where, when, by 
whom the child was baptized. 

Though it is against the law for more than two persons to 
stand sponsors for a child, yet if, in fact, more than two do 
stand, all contract the spiritual relationship. It is against the 
law to have sponsors at a private baptism. Yet persons who 
do stand for a child in private baptism contract the relation- 
ship. The baptism conferred domi in accordance with decree 237 
of the Second Plenary is to be regarded not as private but as 

What name may or must be given to children in Baptism ? 

We have seen a little book published for the use of priests 
which purposes to give in alphabetical order a list of the names 
which alone can be imposed in Baptism. The compiler seems 
to have supposed that only the names found in the Roman 
Martyrology are allowed. That is a mistake. To give a child 
the name of a saint is certainly very consonant to Christian 
piety. But it is another thing to say that any law of the 
Church compels parents to name their child after a canonized 
saint. The law of the Church on the subject is thus expressed 
in the Ritual : 

"Curet parochus, ne obsroena, fabulosa, vel ridicula, vel inanium 
deorum vel impiorum ethnicorum hominum nomina (in baptis- 
mate) imponantur ; sed potius, quatenus fieri poiest, sanctorum" 
Riluak, Tit. ii., C. i, n. 54. 

Sensible priests will take care not to be over-particular in 
this matter. Cur el parochus quantum fieri poiest implies the 
express refusal of the Church to make any binding law in the 

Towards the close of the seventeenth, and in the early part 
of the eighteenth century, no little anxiety was occasioned by 
certain missionaries in the East Indies. It being very true 
that ceremonies in detail do not belong to the essentials of 
religion, some of the missionaries thought it no harm, on the plea 


of smoothing the way to conversion, to substitute some pagan 
form or rites for the Christian. Complaints of this reached 
Rome. Enquiries were set on foot. Reports, more or less 
varying, were obtained. To aid in definitely settling the 
matter, De Tuornon, Patriarch of Antioch, (afterwards Cardinal), 
was sent to the East as commissary of the Holy See, with leg- 
atine powers, by Clement XI. On July 8, 1704, the Legate 
published a formal decree, concerning the use of pagan rites or 
pagan symbols. Among other things we read in the decree : 

"Item praecipimus, ut juxta laudabilem Ecclesiae consuetudi- 
nem semper imponatur baptizando a baptizante nomen alicujus 
sancti in Martyrologio Romano descripti, omnino interdictis nomini- 
bus idolorum, vel falsae religionis pcenitentinm, quibus gentiles 
utuntur, et neophyti hactenus appellari consueverant, antequam 
essent per baptismum divinae gratiae renati." 

De Tournon's decree was approved and made binding by 
solemn decision of Clement XL, in 1706 ; with the added 
clause, however, "donee aliter a Sede Apostolica provisum 

The decree requiring the exclusive use of names found in the 
Martyrology may have been, considering time, and place, and 
circumstances, needed then in the East Indies ; but this added 
clause, donee aliter, shows that it was not accepted as final or 

By special Brief of the same Clement, the decree of De 
Tournon was again confirmed in 1712, but qualified again by the 
clause, "donee aliter, etc." 

Owing to many circumstances, but chiefly, we suppose, to the 
difficulty and delay of communication by any means, at that 
time, between Europe and the far East, or even between the 
missionaries themselves, misunderstandings, in regard to the de- 
cree and its confirmation and interpretation, continued. A 
special Congregation, to enquire into the whole subject, was 
created by Pope Clement's successor, Innocent XIII. Not until 
after Innocent's death, was the work of the Congregation 
brought to a close. Then, in 1727, Benedict XIII. confirmed 
De Tournon's decree anew: " ejusque obedientiam et observantiam 
similiter mandamus et requirimus." That similiter carries with 
it the unexpressed clause, "donee aliter, etc.," as above. 

But this decree of Benedict failed to put an end to the 
confusion in the East. Many of the missionaries never saw the 


text, never heard of the decree. The subject had to be taken 
up again, under Clement XII., 1733. After diligent enquiry, the 
Cardinals of the Holy Office resumed the entire question in sixteen 
Du&i'a, and their decision in each case was solemnly confirmed 
by the Pope. The second of these Dubia, with its answer reads: 

"An et quomodo dictum decretum (Legati, de Tournon,) sit 
exequendum in ea parte, qua? est tenoris sequentis : ' Item 
prcecipimus. /, juxta laudabilem Ealesice consueludinem, semptr im- 
ponatur baptizando a baptizanle nomen alicujus sancti in Martyrologio 
Romano descripti, omnino interdidis nominibus idolorum vel falsa 
religionis pcenilentium, quibus gentiles utuntur, et neophyti hactenus 
appellari consueverant, antequam per baptismum essent divince gratice 
renati j 3 ' ' 

Eminentissimi dixerunt : " Moderandum esse decreium, deieio 
verbo, Praecipimus ; cum dausula : Curent quantum fieri potest ; 
firma remanente interdictione, quoad nomina idolorum et falsce reli- 
gionis poemtentium" Benedict XIV., Const. Omnium Sollicitudinum, 
Sept. 12, 1744- 

In these latter may be included notorious miscreants ; since 
thus keeping their names in honor and memory would imply 
a measure of encomium of their deeds and lives. 

The protracted and, in some respects, painful controversy 
regarding the use of Eastern rites and ceremonies definitely 
fixed, among other good results, the teaching and practice of 
the Church, in regard to the necessity of giving children the 
name of a saint in baptism. It is not an easy thing to learn 
the names of all the saints. Fortunately, we are not required 
to do so, and can accept almost any name given the child 
by those whose right it is to give the names. Some fancy 
names are coming into fashion. There may be a little vanity 
displayed in this. But the parents are not overstepping their 
rights, and the priest can quietly proceed with the baptism. 

Mass is not offered, nor prayers, for baptized children who die 
before reaching the use of reason. "Omnipotens et mitissime 
Deus, qui omnibus parvulis renatis fonte baptismatis, dum 
migrant a saeculo, sine ullis eorum meritis vitam illico largiris 
aeternam, sicut animse hujus parvuli hodie credimus te fecisse, 
etc." Ordo sepeliendi parvulos. 

On the contrary we do say mass and pray for adults baptized 
on their death-bed, even when the baptism is absolute and 
without condition. 


In the case of infant baptism, the whole work of regeneration 
and sanctification is God's, proceeding solely from his infinite 
goodness and mercy. That work is perfect. Hence all sin and 
sin's penalties are fully remitted. The same does not quite 
hold in the baptism of adults, i^o penalty can be remitted 
unless the sin to which it is annexed be blotted out ; and 
no sin can be remitted to which an adult retains an affection 
of which he does not repent. An adult may be baptized then, 
and obtain remission of all grievous actual sin as well as 
original, and yet not be wholly weaned from all affection to 
venial sin. In other words, his contrition may not extend to 
all his venial faults, and the penalties due those may have to 
be paid in purgatory. 

In the case of an infant validly baptized by heretics and then 
brought to the priest, the ceremonies should be supplied. In 
the case of adults validly baptized by heretics, it is not usual 
to supply them. But they may be. Ordo Bap. Adult., 16. 


Qusenam servari debent ceeremoniae, What ceremonies should be observed 

et preces qua? supplendte sunt adulto and prayers supplied in the case of a 

Catholico, valide post nativitatrm bap- Cnthnlic adult who, as a babe, was 

tizato, sed omissis cseremoniis, quos validly baptiz d, hut at whose baptism 

juxta Rituale baptismum pnecedere vel the cerem jnies prescribed, both before 

sequi debent : an illre, quae in Rituali and after the baptism, were omitted : 

assignantur pro baptismo pdullorum are the parts to be supplied from the 

vel .quse pro baptismo infantium ? formula for the Baptism of Adults or 

from that for the Baptism of Infants ? 

Resp. S. R. C. : Creremon'iEe et pre- R. The omitted parts are to be 

ces serventur, qure in Rituali assig- supplied from the formula for the 

nantur pro baptismo infantium. Baptism of Infants. (4780). 


Quoe ex his cjeremoniis servari debent What ceremonies are to be used 

quum adultus ab hoeresi ad fidem when an adult converted from heresy 

Catholicam conversus baptizandus est is to receive conditional 1 aptism 

sub conditione, ob dubium fundatum owing to a well-grounded doubt of 

de validitate baptism! ipsi a ministro the validity of the baptism conferred 

haeretico collati ? by the heretical minister ? 

Resp. S. R. C. : Quatenus supplen- R. If the question be merely of 

d?e sint, et supplendse creclantur ex- supplying the omitted ceremonies, 

remoniiie, ut in dtibio, illae supplendae these are taken from the formula of 

sunt, qure pro adultorum baptismo the Baptism of Adults. 
sunt proescriptse. (4780). 



The new Institute for the training of Italian youths in Italy, 
with the special view of sending them, when ordained, to 
labor as missionaries in this country, among their own country- 
men, is a good idea, and its originator and promoters are well 
deserving the encomiums of the Holy Father. Italians are 
every year coming to the United States in greater numbers, nor 
is the inflow likely to diminish but rather to increase. There 
are. however, as yet few exclusively Italian congregations. But 
the new missionaries, if they have only the spirit of their vocation, 
will be sure to find plenty to do. 

Venerabilis Frater, Salutem ed Apostolicam Benedictionem: 

Libenter agnovimus te pium consilium iniisse excitandi in 
episcopalis tui ministerii sede sacrorum virorum Institution, qui 
animum et voluntatem gerant in dissitas praesertim America? 
plagas proficiscendi, sacri ministerii opem laturi multitudini 
Italorum fidelium, qui, rerum necessitate ad demigrandum de 
patria compulsi, in iis regionibus domicilium statuerunt. Nos 
qui pro Apostolatus Nostri munere salutem animarum prsecipuo 
studio spectamus, quique ea diligenter curare debemus quae eo 
pertinent, ut spiritualibus fidelium necessitatibus consulatur. pium 
tuum consilium, Venerabilis Frater, utile ac opportunem duci- 
mus, eorumque caritatem et zelum gratissimum habebimus, qui 
Christi spiritu ducti, huic sancto operi sese velint devovere. -Nee 
porro dubitamus quin venerabiles fratres Italiae episcopi, pro 
eximio quo flagrant religionis amore, huic pio operi sese fautores 
exhibeant, ac si qui sunt dioecesium suarum sacerdotes, qui cupiant 
hoc ministerio perfungi, eorum religiosum studium assensu 
suo, propensaque omnino si fieri possit voluntate, prosequantur. 

Rogantes interim Omnipotentem Deum, a quo sancta consilia 
et justa sunt opera, ut propitius huic operi adspirel, et idoneos 
operarios mittat in messem suam, Apostolicam Benedictionem 
Nostrae dilectionis testem, tibi, Venerabilis frater, cunctisque tecum 
divinae gloriae et salutis animarum studio conjunctis, peramanter 
in Domino impertimus. 

Datum Romas apud Sanctum Petrum die xxv Novembris anno 
MDCCCLXXXVII, Pontificatus Nostri Decimo. 


Venerabili Fratri Johanni Episcopo Placentino Placentiam. 



Pium et prseclarum opus Propagationis Fidei, tnirabili divinae 
Providentise dispositione pluribus abhinc annis in Gallia primum 
exortum, et dein late per totum Catholicum orbem diffusum, 
omnes norunt quantum ad Catholicam fidem in remotissimis 
etiam regionibus propagandam contulerit. Hinc hujusmodi pium 
opus, vix ac obortum est, Romani Pontifices singulari cura 
prosecuti sunt, et Christifidelibus ut suis elargitionibus quoti- 
dianisque precibus tarn saluberrimurn opus confoverent, indulgen- 
tiarum thesauros reserarunt, et sacerdotibus praesertim, qui vel 
stipem propriam elargiti essent, vel data opera alienam collegissent 
ad illud sustentandura s. m. Pius IX rescripto diei 31 
Decembris 1871, et SSmus Dominus Noster Leo Papi XIII 
rescripto diei 25 Maji 1881, speciales facultates et privilegia 

Jam vero turn circa quasdam conditiones requisitas ut adscript! 
pio operi Propagationis Fidei gaudere valeant indulgentiis, turn 
circa supradictorum rescriptorum rectam intelligentiam plura 
exorta sunt dubia, quorum nonnulla proposita fuerunt huic S. 
Congregationi a quodam sacerdote archidioecesis Mechliniensis, 
specialiter deputato ab archiepiscopo ad colligendas eleemosynas 
in prsefati pii operis subsidium ; alia vero ab abbate S. Meinardi 
Ordinis S. Benedicti in dioecesi Vincennapolitana in Statibus 
Foaderatis Americae Septentrionalis, quae primum exhibita S. 
Congregationi Christiano Nomini propagando praepositae, deinde 
ad hanc Indulgen t tiarum et SS. Reliquiarum transmissa fuerunt. 

Dubia vero sunt quas sequuntur : 

I. In dicecesi ubi pium opus Propagationis Fidei existit 
quidem, annuente ordinario, sed non rite constitutum habetur, 
puta quia non constat ex consilio dioscesano chiliarchiis, 
centuriis et decuriis, quaeritur 1 utrum adscriptus possit frui 
turn indulgentiis plenariis ac partialibus pio illi operi concessis, 
turn (si sit sacerdos) facultatibus et privilegiis presbyteris nonnullis 
impertitis, sive a Summo Pontifice Pio IX rescripto 31 Decembris 
1871, sive a Leone XIII rescripto 25 Maji 1881 ? 2 Quaenam 
dicti pii operis constitutio (organisation) ad haec sufficiat ? 

II. Qualis huic pio operi adscriptio requiratur, ut quis possit 
frui turn indulgentiis, turn facultatibus ac privilegiis concessis ? 

III. Quinam novos sodales adscribendi facultatem habeant? 


IV. Num adscriptus, qui non solet quotidie recitare preces 
praescriptas, scilicet unum Pater et A-ve cum invocatione, 6". 
Frandsce Xaveri ora pro nobis, aut qui suum obolum hebdoma- 
dalem solvere negligit, 1 frui possit indulgentiis ; 2 an 
gaudere saltern facultatibus ac privileges nonnullis presbyteris 
impertitis ? 

V. Per rescriptum 31 Decembris 1871, quod prorogatum fuit 
ad aliud septennium turn 16 Junii 1878, turn 7 Junii 1885, quae- 
dam facultates ac privilecia a Summo Pontifice Pio IX nonnullis 
presbyteris concessa sunt, sed cum expressa clausula de constnsu 
or dinar iorum ; quaeritur autem 1 Utrum sine hoc consensu 
invalide quis illis facultatibus ac privilegiis uteretur ? Et quatenus 
affirmative 2 Utium singuli sacerdotes qui illis facultatibus ac 
privilegiis uti volunt singillatim recurrere debeant ad ordinarium, 
ut ipsius consensum obtineant? 3 An vero ordinarius omnibus 
et singulis sacerdotibus suae dicecesis, qui nempe conditiones 
requisitas adimpleverint, suum consensum in globo dare valeat? 
4 Quin imo, an sustineri possit quod, approbante ordinario 
existentiam pii operis a Propagatione Fidei in sua dicecesi, eo 
ipso sat conditioni ejus consensum obtinendi consultum sit ? 

VI. Quum indultum a Summo Pontifice obtentum ad septennium 
ante expirationem hujus septennii prorogatur ad aliud septennium. 
quaeritur utrum prorogatio currere incipiat ab ipso die, quo ea 
obtinetur, an vero a die quo expirabit prius indultum ? 

VII. Per jam memoratum rescriptum 31 Decembris 1871 
sacerdotibus qui in anno solverint summam 260 francorum, aut 
2600 fr., sive haec ab ipsis collecta fuerit, siv'e fuerit concredita 
ipsorum manibus (centralist dans leurs mains) sive proveniat ab 
ipsorum liberalitate, concessae sunt variae facultates ac privilegia, 
pro annis tamen in quibus (durante septennio) reapse illam 
summam solverint. Quaeritur a quo temporis puncto sacerdos 
collector facultatibus ac privilegiis uti incipere possit ? 

VIII. Utrum 1 Comitatus regionales piorum operum Propa- 
gationis Fidei et Sanctae Infantiae possint se separare a comitatibus 
centralibus Parisiensi et Lugdunensi et societatem independentem 
efformare, quae collectas distribuat in propria sua regione, vel 
etiam in regionibus infidelium omnino juxta scopum praedictorum 
operum, attamen independenter a societatibus centralibus ; et 
utrum 2 ex ipso facto separationis amittant privilegia spiritualia 
his operibus benigne concessa a S. Sede ? 


Emi et Rmi Patres in congregatione generali habita in Palatio 
Apostolico Vaticano die 25 Junii 1887 rescripserunt : 

Ad i m partem dubii I. Affirmative. 

Ad 2 m partem : Optandum et curandum, ut operis constitutio 
fiat juxta normam a S. Sede approbatam ; sin minus sufficit, ut 
saltern ordinarius cum uno vel altero consiliario pio operi prse- 

Ad II. Servetur consuetude : pro lucrandis vero indulgentiis 
fruendisque privilegiis sufficit, ut opera praescripta adimpleantur. 

Ad III. Potest novos sodales adscribere quicumque legitimam 
colligendi eleemosynam habet facultatem. 

Ad i m partem dubii IV. Negative. 

Ad 2 m partem : Affirmative, quatenus ilia privilegia ratione piag 
collectionis eleemosynarum, aut operas prsestitae in comitatibus 
concessa sunt. 

Ad i, 2 m , 3 partem dubii V. Affirmative. 

Ad 4 m partem : Negative. 

Ad VI. A die datae prorogationis, prouti in resolutione S. 
Congregationis 20 Maji 1711. 

Ad VII Sacerdos collector jus ad privilegia habet a die, qua 
vel totam unius anni summam, vel partem summae juxta operis 
statuta solvent. 

Ad i m partem dubii VIII. Non spedare. 

Ad 2 m partem : Amittere indulgentias et privilegia. 

Facia vero de iis omnibus relatione in audientia habita ab 
infrascripto Secretario die 16 Julii, 1887, Sanctissimus Dominus 
Noster Leo Papa XIII responsiones Patrum Cardinalium appro- 

Datum Romse ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis 
Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositse die 16 Julii, 1887. 

Fr. Thomas M. Card. Zigliara Prcefedus. 
Alexander Episcopus Oensis Secretarius. 

E pluribus Dioecesibus ad hanc sacram Congregationem Indul- 
gentiarum et SS. Reliquiarum sequentia dubia dirimenda transmissa 
sunt : 

I. Utrum Decretnm Alexandri Papae VII diei 6 Februarii 
1657, et aliud Decretum S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum et 
SS. Reliquiarum diei 23 Februarii 1711 sint authentica ? 


II. An amittant indulgentias cruces, coronae, rosaria, statuae, 
etc., quse ante omnem usum, ab una, deinde in aliam, tertiam 
et quartern quoque manum transierinl? 

III. An i res indulgentiis dictatae tradi debeant fidelibus 
omnino gratis ; ita ut 2 C si aliquid quocumque titulo sive pretii, 
sive permutationis, sive muneris, sive eleemosynae requiratur, vel 
accipiatur, indulgentise ex hoc -amittantur ? 

IV. Die 12 Januarii 1878 resolutum fuit a S. Congregatione 
Indulgentiarum et SS. Reliquiarum quod, nisi aliud expresse 
habeatur in Indultis, indulgentias lucrandse incipiant non a 
primis vesperis sed a media node ad mediant nocttm. Jam vero 
quaeritur an hoc ita stricte intelligendum veniat, ut non incipiant 
nisi a media ad mediant nodem etiam illse indulgentiae lucrandae 
in festis, si in eafum concessionibus non addatur clausula a 
primis vesperis ? 

V. Generali Decreto S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum et SS. 
Reliquiarum die 9 Augusti 1852 sancitum est, ut fiat translatio 
indulgentiarum, si fiat solemnitatis et externae celebrationis 
translatio. Jam quaeritur 1 utrum illud Decretum valeat non 
solum ubi agitur de indulgentiis concessis omnibus et singulis 
Christifidelibus, sed et ubi agitur etiam de indulgentiis imperlitis 
confraternitatibus, sodalitatibus, piis unionibus etc. 2 utrum valeat 
si agitur de festi translaticne perpetua, sive tantum de festi 
translatione accidentali, qua? hoc vel illo anno fit propter occur- 
rentiam alterius festi majoris ritus vel ciignitatis 3 utrum valeat 
sive translatio fiat in tota Ecclesia, sive tantum in tota dicecesi, 
sive etiam solummodo in una vel altera particulari ecclesia dice- 
cesis? 4 quid proprie intelligatur nomine solemnitatis et externae 
celebrationis festi ? 

VI. Utrum qui habet facultatem benedicendi cruces, rosaria, 
etc., eisque applicandi indulgentias, etiam pro seipso cruces et 
rosaria benedicere queat, hisque utendo sibi quoque indulgentias 
lucrari possit ? 

VII. An is qui habet facultatem adscribendi socios in aliquam 
confraternitatem, vel piam associationem, seipsum illi adscribere 
valeat, ita ut possit indulgentias, quae eidem adnexse sunt, lucrari ? 

Et Emi ac Rmi Patres rescripserunt in generalibus Comitiis 
apud Vaticanum die 25 Junii 1887: 
Ad I. Affirmative. 


Ad II. Negative. 

Ad III. Affirmative ad utramque par lem. 

Ad IV. Standum terminis concessions. 

Ad V. Non indigere rtsponsione. 

Ad VI. Affirmative. 

Ad VII. Affirmative, quatenus base facultas habeatur indiscrimi- 
naiim, minime vero laxative, uti in una Cameracensi 7 Martii 1840. 

Facta vero de iis omnibus relatione in audientia habita a'o 
infrascripto Secretario die 16 Julii 1887, Sanctissimus Dominus 
Noster Leo Papa XIII responsiones Patrum Cardinalium approbavit. 

Datum Romse ex Sscretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum 
et SS. Reliquiarum die 16 Julii 1887. 

Fr. Thomas M. Card. Zigliara Prcefectus. 
Alexander Episcopus Oensis Secretariats. 


By a general decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, 
dated January 8, 1865, all bishops got the right to name the 
rector of the church, in connection with which a sodality exists, 
the moderator of that sodality "si ita in Domino expedire 
judicaverint. " In most of the sodalities the rules or constitutions 
provide for the election by the members themselves of their 
moderator or spiritual director. The choice of the members, it 
may easily be conceived, might fall on one very unacceptable to 
the rector of the church, or on one whom rector or bishop may 
not think quite the proper person for that particular office. 
To obviate any friction that may result from an unwise choice 
by the sodalists, the ordinary of the diocese is empowered so far to 
suspend the regular rule as to designate himself the moderator of 
the sodality. The question now is : Suppose a rector so nominated 
by the bishop die or leave for another parish, does his successor, 
by the mere fact of being his successor as rector, become mod- 
erator of the sodality, or must he be specially appointed by the 
bishop, as was his predecessor. The answer is, this second rector 
has no need of any special appointment. He becomes moder- 
ator of the sodality by the very fact of succeeding to the rector- 


A second query was this : By a general decree of Clement 
XIII., dated August 2, 1780, it was granted that members of a 
sodality prevented by sickness or imprisonment from making the 
generally prescribed visit to the church in order to gain the so- 
dality indulgences, could gain them just the same by performing 
some other pious works enjoined, instead of the visit. In February 
last a doubt regarding this matter was proposed to the S. Con- 
gregation. The doubt hinges on the words found in the decree 
of Pope Clement "and this favor shall be granted to any sodality 
on request." The question in February 1887 was: Can the 
members of a sodality on the part of which the request was 
never made gain the indulgences in that way, that is, without 
visiting the church ? The answer is No, they cannot. The re- 
quest is necessary. But, adds the S. Cong., it is the intention 
to petition His Holiness for a general decree extending the 
privilege at once to all sodalities. And this from the Sacred Con- 
gregation of Indulgences itself. It is well known that the Holy 
Father, unless in a very rare case, always assents to the decisions 
of the Cardinals. However, the general decree has not yet been 
published. To enquiries on the subject now, the S. Cong, replies 
that the Pope assented to their conclusion in February, and 
consequently that sodalities need not individually petition : second, 
that the hindrances so far allowed are onlv sickness or impris- 
onment ; but a petition will be laid before the Holy Father to 
include other reasonable causes and to empower confessors to 
name the pious work to be substituted for the visit to the 

The concession is only in regard to the visit to the church 
and does not cover the omission of any of the other conditions. 

Unless the names are inscribed in the book of the confra- 
ternity, members, though formally and regularly received, do not 
gain the indulgences of the confraternity. 

Tres quaestiones huic S. Congregationi Indulgentiarium et SS. Reliquiarum 
dirimendas proposuit Procurator generalis Societatis Jesu, quae plura dubia 
complectuntur. Prima qurcstio proposita est de facultate episcoporum quoad 
designationem rectorum Confraternitatum, seu Sodalitatum, quarum statuta 
generatim ferunt ut singulis annis, ricut ceterorum officinlium, ita et mode- 
ratorum fiat electio. Quamvis vero hoec S. Congregatio, edito general! 
decreto sub die 8 Januarii 1865, declaraverit imprrtitam esse facultatem 
ordinariis, ut libere designare possent, si ita in Domino expedire judicaverint, 
parochos fro tern fore in rectores, moderatores Confraternitatum, seu Sodali- 
tatum, dubitatum tamen est a nonnullis, an facultas nominandi parochos 
pro tempore ita sit intelligenda, ut defuncto actual! parocho, vel etiam amoto, 


qui moderator erat alicujus Confraternitatis, vel Sodalitatis in sua parochial! 
ecclesia erectos, novus parochus iterum indigeat episcopi nominatione, ut 
rector Confraternitatis seu Sodalitatis eligatur. 

Altera qusestio respicit generale decretum editum a f. r. Clemente XIII. 
sub die 2 Augusti 1760, quo benigne concesserat, ut confratres et consorores 
uniuscujusque Confraternitatis, seu Sodalitii aut Congregationis ubique 
locorum existentis canonice erecte aliqua corporis infirmi>ate laborantes, aut 
carceribus detenti, eisdem omnibus et singulis Indulgentiis, quibus ceteri 
gaudent confratres et consorores, gaudere valerent, dummodo loco visitationis 
ecclesise, fere semper prrescriptre, alia pia opera injuncta peregerint, quee 
pro viribus peragere possent, simulque indulgebatur hanc gratiam suffragari 
in perpetuum, et ad preces cujuscumque Sodalitii, Confraternitatis, seu 
Congregationis 'concedi. Jam vero quum a S. Congreg. Indulgentiarum 
qusesitum fuerit anno 1877, " Utrum confratres et consorores cujuscumque 
Confraternitatis tune existentis facultale in Decreto (Clementino) concessa 
gaudere possint et valeant, sine recursu ad S. Sedem, vel ad hoc dictus 
recursus sit necessarius ex verbis sequentibus proefati decreti voluitque 

Sanctitas Sua hanc gratiam ad preces cujuscumque Sodalitii concedi? 

--", et S. Congregatio respondisset : Negative ad primam partem: Affirmative 
ad secundum, et ad men tern : mens est supplicandum SSmo, ut per Decre- 
tum generale extendatur ad omnes confratres cujuscumque Confraternitatis, 
aut Sodalitii Indultum lucrandi singulas Indulgentias, exercendo opera quse 
pro viribus peragere poterunt ; pariter dubitatum est an illud Geneial: De- 
cretum, quod ab hac S. Congregation e evulgandum postulabatur, et tamen 
evulgatum non existit, necessario adhuc requiratur, quum aliunde in decreto 
diei 25 Februarii 1877 expresse dicatur Summum Pontificem expetitam gra- 
tiam concessisse, absque ulla mentione generalis decreti evulgandi. 

Postrema detnum qurestio mota est de necessitate inscribendi nomina con- 
fratrum in libro Confraternitatis, seu Sodalitii, prsesertim si agatur de 
Sodalitiis, seu Confraternitalibus, in quibus, etsi ritus adhibeatur in receptione 
confratrum et consororum, earumdem tamen statuta inscriptionem minime 
requirunt, saltern explicite, uti conditionem essentialem pro lucrandis Indul- 

Quare dubia solvenda hsec sunt : 

I. An stante Decreto diei 8 Januarii 1861, quo episcopis speciales con- 
cessce sunt facultates nominandi parochos pro tempore in rectores Sodalitatum, 
defuncto actuali parocho vel amoto, qui alicui Sodalitati prreerat, novus par- 
ochus nova iterum indigeat episcopi nominatione ad hoc ut rector Sodalitatis 
eligatur ? 

II. Quum in Decreto diei 25 Februarii 1877 in responsione ad i m sermo 
sit de general! Decreto vulgando in favorem omnium confratrum cujuscum- 
que Confraternitatis, quumque Decretum hujusmodi vulgatum non fuerit, 
quaeritur 1 an hsec concessio nunc reapse valeat pro omnibus Confraterni- 
tatibus seu Sodalitiis, aut Congregationibus sine speciali recursu cujusque 
Confraternitatis seu Sodalitii ad S. Sedem, qui antea requirebatur ? Et 
quatenus affirmative 2 utrum valeat tantum pro confratribus infirmis, vel 
carceribus detent : s, de quibus solis primaeva concessio dementis Papse XIII 
loquebatur? 3 etiam extensa sit ad confratres gravi alia ex causa legitime 


impeditos ? Et quatenus negative ad tertiam partem 4 humiliter ea ex- 
tensio nunc petitur. 

III. Utrum 1 concessio supradicta valeat tantum pro iis confratribus, qui 
impediti sunt quominus praescriptam ecclesiae visitationem peragere possint 
2 an vero etiam pro illis qui prohibentur quominus aliquam aliam conditi- 
onem ad lucrandas Indulgentias praescriptam impleant. 

IV. Utrum in iis Sodalitiis, quae solemnem aliquem receptionis ritum 
adhibent (ut Congregationes B. Marias Virginis) confratres hoc solemni modo 
a legitimo Sodalitatis praeside recepti lucrari possint Indulgentias, licet in 
libro Sodalitatis non inscribantur ? 

V. Utrum generatim inscriptio sit omnino necessaria ad lucrandas Indul- 
gentias, etiamsi statuta Confraternitatis, Congregationis vel piae Unionis non 
explicite requirant inscriptionem tamquam conditionem essentialem ? 

Et Emi ac Rmi Patres in generalibus Comitiis ad Vaticanum coadunatis 
die 25 Junii 1887 rescripserunt: 

Ad I. Negative. 

Ad I partem dubii II. Affirmative, et supplicandum Sanctissimo pro 
promulgatione Decreti juxta resolutionem S. Congregation^ diti 25 Februarii 

Ad 2 m partem : Affirmative. 

Ad 3"> partem : Negative. 

Ad 4 partem : Supplicandum Sanctissimo pro benigna extensione ad 
alia legitima impedimenta judicio discreti confessarii dignoscerida, commutato 
tamen ab eodem confessario opere injuncto visitationis ecclesiae in aliud 
pium opus. 

Ad i m partem dubii III. Affirmative. 

Ad 2 m partem : Negative. 

Ad IV. Negative si agatur de Confraternitatibus proprie dictis. 

Ad V. Piovisum in prcecedenli. 

De quibus omnibus facta per infrascriptum S. Congregationis Secretarium 
relatione die 16 Julii 1887, Sanctitas Sua responsiones Emorum Patrum 
confirmavit, simulque mandavit expediri Decretum de quo in prima parte 
dubii secundi, et benigne concessit petitam extensionem, juxta modum ex- 
pressum in responsione ad quartam partem ejusdem dubii secundi. 

Datum Romae ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis Sacrisque Re- 
liquiis praepositae, die 16 Julii 1887. 



Intra pia opera quae ad lucrandas indulgentias praescribi solent, 
potissimum recensenda est visitatio alicujus ecclesiae vel etiam 
public! sacelli. Jam vero Clemens fel. rec. Papa XIII valde 


cupiens spiritual! bono prospicere confratrum et consororum con- 
fraternitatum vel sodalitatum sive congregationum ubique locorum 
existentium et auctoritate ordinariorum erectarum, benigne in- 
dulserat sub die 2 Augusti 1 760, ut earumdem confratres et 
consorores aliqua corporis infirmitate laborantes vel carceribus 
detenti eisdem omnibus et singulis indulgentiis, quibus gaudent 
ceteri confratres et consorores, gaudere possent, ita tamen ut, 
omissa visitatione ecclesiae, alia pia injuncta opera, quae pro 
viribus peragere possent, fideliter ac devote exequerentur ; quam 
gratiam idem Summus Pontifex mandaverat ad preces cujusque 
confraternitatis seu sodalitatis vel congregationis concedi. 

Quum vero anno 1874 sub die 8 Maji Emi Patres Indul- 
gentiis Sacrisque Reliquiis tuendis praepositi, in generalibus 
Comitiis apud Vaticanum habitis proposito dubio, an adhuc re- 
quireretur recursus ad Apostolicam Sedem uniuscujusque con- 
fraternitatis seu sodalitatis vel congregationis, ut earumdem 
confratres et consorores Clementino indulto perfrui valerent, in. 
affirmativam iverint sententiam, simulque censuerint supplicandum 
SSmo, ut per Decretum generale praefatum indultum concede- 
retur confratribus et consororibus omnium confraternitatum, 
sodalitatum seu congregationum absque earumdem speciali re- 
cursu, Pius Papa IX sub die 25 Februarii anni 1877 petitam 
gratiam benigne elargitus est, nulla tamen facta speciali mentione 
de generali ejusdem Decreto evulgando, prout ab hac Sacra 
Congregatione postulatum fuerat. Ex quo nonnulli arbitrati 
sunt haudquaquam necessarium fore, ut singulae confraternitates, 
sodalitates vel congregationes hoc indultum sibi peterent ; alii 
vero huic sententiae minime acquiescentes denuo dubium pro- 
posuerunt : An ilia concessio (Indulti Clementini) nunc reapse valeat 
pro omnibus confraternitatibus seu sodalitiis aut congregaiionibus sine 
speciali recursu ad Sanctam Sedem, qui antea requirebatur? Cui 
quidem dubio Emi Patres in generali Congregatione penes Aedes 
Vaticanas habita sub die 25 Junii hujus decurrentis anni, ad 
removendam omnem dubitandi rationem, rescripserunt : Affir- 
mative, et supplicandum Sanctissimo pro promulgatione Decreti juxta 
resolutionem S. Congregationis diei 25 Februarii 1887. 

Quare de his omnibus facta relatione SSmo Dno Nostro Leoni 
XIII in audientia habita ab infrascripto Secretario ejusdem S. 
Congregationis die 16 Julii 1887, idem SSmus benigne decla- 
rari et decerni mandavit, prout prcesenti Decreto declaratur et 
decernitur, memoratum Indultum Clementinum extendi ad omnts con- 


fraternitates, sodalitates tt congregationes, quin in posterum quaelibet 
confraternitas, sodalitas seu congregatio opus habeat special! 
recursu ad Sanctam Sedem, ut praefato indulto perfrui valeat. 
Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum Romae, ex Secretaria ejusdem S. Congregationis die 20 
Augusti 1887. 


ALEXANDER Episcopus Oensis Secretarius. 


* ****** Jan. 13, 1888. 

REV. DEAR SIR : Could you throw any light upon this case : Solemn 
marriages are allowed after the day of the Epiphany ; and yet votive mass 
pro sponso et sponsa is forbidden during the octave of the Epiphany : why 
is this so ? Or is it so ? It appears to me very queer. 

Of course we can say mass of the day with Com. of mass pro sponso 
et sponsa. Yet it is a sort of a puzzle to me. 

L. S. 

Tt is so. The mass pro sponso et sponsa is a votive. As a 
general rule votive masses are not permitted on doubles of any 
rite nor on days excluding a double feast. From this general 
rule the votive pro sponso et sponsa has by special law so far 
been excepted as to make its celebration lawful, except on doubles 
of the first or second class and on days that exclude such 
doubles. The law is laid down in decree 4415 (Gardellini) from 
which it will be sufficient to quote : " Hinc Sacr. eadem Con- 
gregatio praesenti generali decreto statuit : In celtbralione 

nuptiarum, qua fit extra diem Dominicum, vel alium diem feslum de 
prcBcepto, seu in quo occur rat dttplex primce vel secundce classis, 
etiamsi fiat officium et miss'a de festo duplici per annum sive majori 
sive minori dicendam esse missam pro sponso tt sponsa in fine mis- 
salis post alias missas votivas specialiter assignatam : in diebus vero 
Dominicis aliisque diebus festis de prcecepto ac duplicibus primce et 
secundce classis dicendam esse missam de festo cum commemoratione 
missce pro sponso et sponsa." 

Die 20 Decembris, 1883. 

Praefatum S. Congr. Generale Decretum confirmavit et ubique 
executioni dandum esse praecepit Pius PP. VI. die 7 Januarii 

Of course, when the celebratio ipsa nuptiarum is prohibited, 
that is, from Ash-Wednesday to the Sunday after Easter, and 
from the first Sunday of Advent to the Epiphany inclusively, the 
votive pro sponso et sponsa is, by the very fact, prohibited: that 
votive is allowed at any time only for the sake of the nuptial 


All the days infra octavam Epiphaniae are privileged in this, 
that the dies infra octavam does not give way in occurrence 
to a double of the second class : 

" Infra octavam Epiphaniae si occurrat festum duplex ex 
majoribus vel alicujus Doctoris Ecclesiae, transfertur post octavam 
nisi fuerit (festum) patroni vel titularis ecclesiae vel dedicatio 
ejusdem. De aliis vero duplicibus, de semiduplicibus et simplicibus, 
fit commemoratio juxta rubricas." Ruhr. 

Doubles of the second class even cannot be celebrated infra 
octavam Epiphaniae. But doubles of the second class would 
exclude the votive pro sponso et sponsa. A fortiori the votive 
is excluded on the days within the octave. 

For a similar reason the votive pro sponso et sponsa is for- 
bidden on the vigil of Pentecost and the days within the octave 
and on the octave day of Corpus Christi. 1 

The octave of Corpus Christi, though privileged, is not as 
highly privileged as the Epiphany. For, as we have seen, only 
feasts of first class can be celebrated within the octave of the 
Epiphany, whereas, within the octave of Corpus Christi, the 
feast of any occurring double is celebrated, and within the octave 
may also be placed doubles of the first or second class trans- 
ferred. The rubric reads ; ' ' Infra octavam non fit de festo 

nisi fuerit duplex nee fit de duplici majori translate 

nisi fuerit pritnae vel secundae classis. In die octavo non fit 
nisi de nativitate S. Joannis et de festo SS. Apost. Petri et 
Pauli vel de alio ex solemnioribus." See Qu&siiones Mechlini- 
enses Qq. 40 and 41. 

We may add from Wapelhorst, Compendium Sacrae Liturgiae : 
" Prohibetur missa votiva pro sponso et sponsa in feria Rogatio- 
num, si praeter missam praescriptam Rogationum alia missa 
celebrari non possit/' n. 292. 

Fathe r Wapelhorst properly deduces this conclusion from the 
following decree with an a fortiori. 


Revmus N. sequens exhibuit Dubium : An in parochia in qua 
praeter parochum null us est alius sacerdos, si in diebus S. Marci 

1 Also on the days within the octave where by special concession the 
octave of Corpus Christi is equally privileged with that of the Epiphany: 


Cum per Decretum Generale S. hujus Congregationis die 20 Decembris 
1783 dies designentur, quibus missa pro sponso et sponsa, etiam diebus 
excludentibus duplicia per annum, ideoque etiam infra octavam Epiphanise 
in vigilia Pentecostes et infra octavam privilegiatam SSmi Corporis Christi: 
alii vero putant his etiam diebus eandem missam vetitam : idcirco idem 
orator petiit declarari : 

An hujusmodi missa dici possit diebus duplicia excludentibus ut supra 
notatis ? 

Resp. : Negative quoad octavam Epiphanise vigiliam Pentecosten et octavam 
privilegiatam SSmi Corporis Christi, quatenns privilegium concession sit ad 
instar octazxz Epiphanice. 


et Rogationum et in vigilia Pentecostes occurrat sepultura, quae 
anticipari vel difFerri non possit, facienda sit sepultura sine missa 
defunctorum, vel potius omittenda functio diei aut saltern missa 
hujus functionis, ut missa pro sepultura celebrari possit? 

Resp.: Affirmative ad primam partem ; Negative ad secundam 
et tertiam. Die 3 Julii. 1869 (5439). 

* Jan. 14, 1888. 

REV. DEAR SIR : You will oblige a Subscriber, by giving your opinion on 
the following question, in your next issue : 

"John, a Protestant, and Mary, a Catholic, contract matrimony before 
the Squire. John goes to the war, and not returning, Mary contracts anew 
with Francis, a Protestant, also before the Squire. Several children have 
been born of the second marriage, and trained in the Catholic faith, with 
the full knowledge and acqu r escence of the father. In the course of time 
Mary hears from an undoubted source that John still lives, and, failing to 
find her, has sought and obtained a divorce. Mary is stung with remorse. 
Francis never heard of John, and thinks Mary his lawful wife. So think 
her neighbors. Unhappy Mary! What can she do? How can she leave 
her home and her children. 

Maria et Franciscus sunt provecti aetate. Neuter petit vel reddit debitum. 
Quse quum ita sint, quseritur utrum Maria potest habitare in domo Joannis, 
apparenter qua marita : I. dormiens eodem in toro; 2. non dormiens eodem 
in toro ? Si hoc sit illicitum, quid agere debet prudens confessarius ? 


Prudentis confessarii est rem ad ordinarium deferre. Hujus 
erit, quibus possit mediis, investigare utrum primum matrimonium 
validum fuerit, necne. Si validum, ordinarii deinde erit inquirere 
utrum adsit, et quam proxime, periculum peccandi pro Maria in 
contubernio cum marito putativo. Si omnino remotum tale sit 
periculum, quod quidem non facile credendum est, forte ordin- 
arius contubernium permittet, quamdiu res divulgata non fuerit et 
Franciscus primi matrimonii ignarus remanet. Si detegatur prim- 
um matr. fuisse invalidum, secundi investiganda est validitas; an 
forte exstiterit inter Franciscum et Mariam impedimentum dirimens, 
puta, disparitatis cultus. Hac investigatione facta, pastori trita 
est via. 

Cum matrimonium ad forum pertineat externum, et rectores 
ecclesiarum nullam (nisi in minimis ex consuetudine) habeant in 
eo foro jurisdictionem, de validitate vel invaliditate alicujus 
matrimonii, quod in dubium vocatur, sententiam proferre audere 
non debent. 

While Mary's case is now a very sad one, as is the case of 


any Catholic, man or woman, going with eyes wide open to the 
devil, it would be well nigh sinful to waste sympathy on the 
creature. Sympathy would be next door to the wish that God's 
laws the Church laws had not been so stern, and might 
allow Mary and her kind go and live with one, two, three, four, or 
five men, as occasion offer, heedless from first to last of the 
marriage tie. Let Mary do penance. Let her pastor lead her 
to a consciousness of her guilt and pray that God in his mercy 
may grant her to realize the hypocrisy and sinfulness of her 
life. By misplaced sympathy her rector may cause Mary to 
think that somehow the Church laws, not her own lust and 
irreligion, are to blame for her present plight. If she come to 
harboring such a thought, her chances of having sincere sorrow 
for her sins are slim indeed. In Mary's case this sincere sorrow 
is the one thing necessary. It will be accompanied by a sub- 
missive humble will to do, at whatever cost, what the ordinary 
may prescribe. The pastor's business with Mary is only to 
bring her, with the help of God's grace, to this mood of mind. 


All publications to be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the Editor, Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranford, N. J. 

A priest of the diocese of Erie writes: "I send you a copy 
of the first edition of a little diocesan work, which I have just 
published for the benefit of the recently deceased clergy of our 
diocese. I regard it as useful both for the dead and the living." 
The so-called work exhibits, on a page 3 inches by 5, five 
photographs of the diocesan clergy who died in the closing 
months of 1886 and during the year 1887. The photographs 
are cheap tin-types, about the size of half-a-dollar each, and 
pasted on over the printed name of the respective clergymen. 
On a wing on either side of the 3 by 5 page is a brief notice 
of each of the deceased, born studied at ordained labored at 
died . These wings are but half the width of the page 
containing the photographs, and are arranged to fold in on that 
page. When the wings are closed they show: "Memorial card 
1887 Diocese of Erie, Pa. Requiescant in pace." On the 
back of the page containing the photographs is printed the 


psalm De profundis, with the prayer Deus qui inter apostolicos and 
a few stanzas from the Dits tree. As might be expected, the 
memorial has a bordering in black. Folded, the memorial can 
be used, as was intended, for a breviary mark. 

We quote again from our correspondent's pious letter : 
" I send you this, that the attention of our priests through- 
out the country may be called to the duty that charity, and I 
might almost say justice, imposes upon us of being more mind- 
ful than we generally are of the souls of our departed breth- 
ren. If such a little page as this were annually issued in 
every diocese, deceased priests would be remembered more fre- 
quently, than they are, in the Holy Sacrifice, and more feelingly 
too, by at least their own fellow-workers in the vineyard. For 
twenty dollars, or even less, a hundred copies like the enclosed 
could be annually issued. If the priests of a diocese united 
in bearing the expense, the tax on each would amount only 
to a few cents." 

LOST AND FOUND AND OTHER STORIES. Small octavo, cloth, pp. 288. 
Thomas B. Noonan & Co., Boston, 1887. 

Mr. Noonan has published some very good Tales and Stoiies. 
They have been noticed from time to time in THE PASTOR, 
and favorably. Lost and Found is a Catholic story, and Catholic 
without being of the goody-goody kind. It will compare very 
well with our classical English novels and romances. We cheer- 
fully call priests' attention to the Book- It will be a happy 
accession to any Sunday-School library. The Other Stories are 
not bad. The author of Lost and Found need not be ashamed 
to give her name. 

THE BAD CHRISTIAN, or Sermons on the Seven Deadly Sins, and the 
different Sins against God and our Neighbor which flow therefrom, in 
seventy-six Sermons, adapted to all the Sundays and Holy Days of the 
year, with a full Index of all the Sermons and Alphabetical Index of 
the principal subjects treated, and copious Marginal Notes by the Rev. 
Father Francis Ilunolt, S. J. ; translated from the original German 
edition of Cologne, 1740, by the Rev. J. Allen, D. D. 2 large octavo 
vols., pp. 515 533, Benziger Bros., 1888. 

THE CHURCH AND THE AGE, an exposition of the Catholic Church in 

view of the needs and aspirations of the present age ; by VERY REV. 

I. T. HECKER. Pp. 322, lamo. New York: Office of the Catholic World. 

There is quite an odor of the Brook Farm about this work, 

and entirely too much spread-eagleism. We shall have more to 

say about the book by and by. 

Of/o magi's sen/ire compundionem quam scire ejus definitionem* " a Kempis. 


FEBRUARY, 1887. 

No. 4. 


By the decree Inter densas, VOL. V., 365, (Sept. II, 1887,) 
the feast of the Most Holy Rosary first Sunday of October 
was raised to the rite of a double of the second class. 

The special privilege accorded the feast of the Solemnity of 
the Holy Rosary in its o\*ui class while it was only a major 
double, namely, quod non posset '"amandari ad aliam diem, 
nisi occurrente officio potioris ritus," (supra II. 339,) is de- 
clared to be still attached to this feast ; so thai, even for a 
primary feast of second class, the feast of the Rosary is not 
to be transferred from the first Sunday of October. In its class, 
it is still privileged as before. 

Beginning with the Encyclical Supremi apostolatus of 1883, 
(Vol. I. p. 353), THE PASTOR has successively published the several 
documents, as they appeared, concerning the October devotions 
and the feast of the Solemnity of the Holy Rosary. Some ex- 
tracts from these documents, however, set down here together in 
the order of the dates of their publication, we have no doubt 
will be acceptable to our readers. For future reference it will not 
be necessary to go searching them up from volume to volume ; 
and at the approach of each October, and indeed of each May, 
a reperusal of some or all will be useful, if not necessary. 
The same indulgences and privileges are to remain, subject to 
the same conditions. 

From the Enfydical Supremi apostolatus. (Sept. I, 1883, THE PASTOR, I., 353.) 

" Moved by these thoughts and by the example of our prede- 
cessors we have deemed it most opportune to institute at this 
time solemn prayers, and to endeavor, by adopting those (prayers; 
addressed to the Blessed Virgin in the recital of the Rosary, to 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1887. All rights reserved. 


obtain from her Son, Jesus Christ, aid, as of old, in our present 
necessities. You have before your eyes, Venerable Brethren, the 
sufferings and severe trials which the Church has daily to en- 
dure: Christian piety, public morality, nay, even faith itself, the 
supreme good and foundation of all the other virtues, all are daily 
.menaced with the greatest perils. And not only are you aware 
of the difficulties of our position, and how much we have to 
suffer, but in such sort does your charity unite and bind you to 
us, as to make yourselves participate in our anguish. 

It is surely one of the most painful and grievous sights to 
see so many souls, redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ, 
swept into evil courses, as by a whirlwind, in this age of error, 
and precipitated into the abyss of eternal death. Our need of 
divine help is no less to-day than when the great Dominic 
introduced the use of the Rosary of Mary as a remedy for 
the evils of his day. That great saint, divinely enlightened as he 
was, perceived that no remedy would be more adapted to the 
evils of his time than to get men to return to Christ, who 
" is the way, the truth, and the life/' by frequent meditation 
on the salvation obtained for us by Him, and to get them to 
seek the intercession of that Virgin, to whom it is given to 
destroy all heresies. He therefore so composed the Rosary as 
to recall the mysteries of our salvation in succession; and the 
subject of meditation is mingled and, as it were, interlaced 
with the angelic salutation and with the prayer addressed to 
God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. We, who seek a 
remedy for similiar evils, do not doubt, therefore, that the 
prayer introduced by that most blessed man with so much 
advantage to the Catholic world, will have the greatest effect 
in removing the calamities of our times also. Hence not only 
do we earnestly exhort all Christians to give themselves to the 
recital of the pious devotion of the Rosary publicly, or privately 
in their own house and family, and that, unceasingly, but we 
also desire that the whole of the month of October in this year 
should be consecrated to the Holy Queen of the Rosary. 

Wherefore we decree and order that in the whole Catholic 
world, this year, the devotion of the Rosary shall be solemnly 
celebrated by special and splendid services. From the first day 
of next October, therefore, until the second day of the November 
following, in every parish, and, if the ecclesiastical authority 
deem it opportune and of use, in every chapel dedicated to 


the Blessed Virgin let five decades of the Rosary be recited 
with the addition of the Litany of Loretto. We desire that, 
when the people come to these holy exercises, either Mass be 
said or the Blessed Sacrament be exposed to the adoration of 
the faithful, Benediction being afterwards given with the Sacred 
Host to the pious congregation. We highly approve of the 
confraternities of the Holy Rosary of the blessed Virgin following 
ancient custom, --that is, going in procession through the town, 
as a public demonstration of their devotion. And in those places 
where this is not possible, owing to the evils of the times, let 
it be replaced by more assiduous visits to the churches, and 
let the fervor of piety display itself by a still greater diligence in 
the exercise of the Christian virtues. 

In favor of those who shall do as we have above laid down, 
we are pleased to open the heavenly treasure-house of the 
Church, that they may find therein at once a stimulus to, and 
a reward for, their piety. We therefore grant to all those who, 
in the prescribed space of time, shall take part in the public 
recital of the Rosary and the Litany, and pray for our in- 
tention, an indulgence of seven years and seven quarantines, 
obtainable each time. We will that those also shall share in 
these favors who are hindered by lawful cause from joining 
in the public prayers of which we have spoken, provided they 
practise those devotions in private, and pray to God for ,Qur 
intention. We remit all punishment and penalties for sans com- 
mitted, in the form of a Pontifical indulgence, to all who, within 
the prescribed time, either publicly in the churches, or privately 
at home, (when hindered from the former by lawful cause,) 
shall perform these pious "exercises at least ten times, and who, 
after due confession, shall approach the holy table. We further 
grant a plenary indulgence to those who, either on the Feast of 
the Blessed Virgin of the Rosary or within its octave, after hav- 
ing similarly purified their souls by a salutary confession, shall 
approach the table of Christ and pray in some church, accord- 
ing to Our intention, to God and the Blessed Virgin for the 
necessities of the Church. 

And you, Venerable Brethren the more you have at heart the 
honor of Mary, and the welfare of human society, the more dili- 
gently will you apply yourselves to nourish the piety of the 
people towards the great Virgin, and to increase their confidence 
in her. We believe it to be the work of Providence that, in 


these times of trial for the Church, the ancient devotion to the 
august Virgin still lives and flourishes, exceptionally, almost 
throughout the entire Christian world. And now, may all 
Christian nations, excited by our exhortations, and inflamed by 
your appeals, seek the protection of Mary with an ardor grow- 
ing greater day by day ; let them cling more and more to 
the practice of the Rosary, to that devotion which our ancestors 
were in the habit of practising, not only as an ever-ready 
remedy for their misfortunes, but as a distinctive mark of 
Christian piety. The heavenly Patroness of the human race will 
receive with joy these prayers and supplications, and will easily 
obtain grace for the good, to grow in virtue, and for the 
erring, to return and repent ; and that God, the avenger, 
moved to mercy and pity, will deliver Christendom and civil 
society from all dangers, and restore to them the peace so 
much desired." 

It is quite evident from this encyclical, that the primary aim 
of the October devotions is to obtain of Almighty God that 
independence and freedom of action, needed by the Sovereign 
Pontiff. It will be well not to lose sight of this purpose, and 
by repeated explanations of the situation make the people com- 
prehend both the motive and the need of the devotion, and 
thus bring them to feel at one with the entire Catholic world 
in pei forming these October devotions. 


Ad presidium columenque militantis To protect and defend the Church 

Ecclesiae virum sanctissimum excitavit militant, God in His mercy raised 

misericors Deus, Dominicum Guzman- up the holy man Dominic Guzman, 

num., inclytum Ordinis Prscdicatorum the illustrious founder and father of 

conditorem et patrem, qui pugnare the Order of Friars Preachers. This 

pro Ecclesia Catholica aggressus est, hoiy man undertook to battle for the 

maxime precatione confisus, quam Catholic Church, relying on the Most 

sacri Rosarii Marian! nomine primus Holy Rosary of Mary, a prayer which 

instituit, et per se suosque alumnos Dominic was the first to institute, and 

longe lateque disseminavit. Admira- which was made known far and wide 

bilem hanc precandi formulam nobilis by his efforts and those of his reli- 

nstar tesseroe Christianas pictatis gious Order. Caiholics have ever 

Catholici semper habere consueverunt. regarded this admirable form of 

prayer as a noble badge of Christian 




Quare vix ac sanctissimus Dominus 
Noster Leo Papa XIII. ad opem a 
Jesu Christo per Mariatn Virgin em, 
Ejus Matrem, praesentibus necessitati- 
bus impetrandam, integrum nfensem 
Octobrem Rosarii precibus in toto 
Catholico orbe hoc anno exigendum, 
encyclicis datis litteris, indixit : ubique 
sacrorum antistites et fideles populi, 
supremi Pastoris voluntati cbtemper- 
antes, frequentissima Rosarii recitatione 
pietatis suse et dilrctionis erga Dei 
Matrem peramantissimam splendida 
argumenta exhibuerunt, certain spein 
foventes se, eadem Beatissima Virgine 
opitulante, a ccelesti misericordiarum 
Patre in proesentibus, tarn privatis, 
quam communibus, Christianse reipub- 
licae calamitatibus efficacius optata 
subsidia impetraturos. 

Jamvero sanctissimus idem Dominus 
Noster, summopere cupiens turn au- 
gere cultum erga ipsam augustam 
Dei Genitricem hac prsesertim orandi 
consuetudine eidem Virgini gratissima, 
turn Christifideles ad hoc obsequium 
ei praestandum magis magisque ex- 
citari, humillimas preces sibi oblatas 
a Rmo Patre Josepho Maria Larroca, 
magistro generali Ordinis Prasdica- 
torum, nimirum ut litaniis Lauretanis 
addendam indulgeat Regince a Rosario 
invocationem, quje jamdudum apud 
Dominicanam familiam in usu est, be- 
nigne ac perlibenter excepit. 

Voluit prseterea sanclitas sua prascepit 
que, ut coeteris litaniarum Lauretana- 
rum Beatoe Marise prseconiis, et hoc in 
Ecclesia universa in posterum addatur, 
postremo loco, scilicet, " Regina Sacra- 
tissimi Rosarii, ora pro nobis." 

Mandavit praeterea super his expediri 
I.itteras in forma Btevis. Contrariis 
non obstantibus quibuscumque. 
Die 10, Decembris 1883. 
D. Card. BartoHni, S. R. C. Pro:/. 

Scarcely, therefore, had our Holy 
Father Pope Leo XIII. issued his 
Encyclical Letter, ordering the entire 
month of October to be spent through- 
out the whole Catholic world in the 
prayer ot the Rosary, to obtain from 
Jesus Christ, through Mary His Virgin 
Mother, help in our present neces- 
sities, than the Bishops and the faith- 
ful, obedient to the voice of the 
Supreme Pontiff, gave on all sides 
splendid proofs of their filial love to 
the most loving Mother of God. 
Constantly was the Rosary recited, and 
fondly was the hope cherished by all 
that, through the prayers of the same 
most Blessed Virgin, succor would 
come from the heavenly Father of 
mercies to the relief both of individ- 
uals and of all Christendom in these 
calamitous times. 

His Holiness desired nothing more 
ardently than to increase devotion to 
the most august Mother of God by a 
form of prayer so pleasing to this 
Most Holy Virgin. He urged the 
faithful more and more to pay her ihis 
homage. And therefore he graciously 
and most willingly granted the petition 
ot the Master-General of the Order 
of Friars Preachers, the Right Rev- 
erend Father Joseph Maria Larroca, 
that the invocation,. Queen of the 
Rosary, as used by the Dominicans, 
should be added to the Litany of 

Accordingly his Holiness desired 
and ordered that, at the end of the 
Litany of Loretto, throughout the 
whole Church, this title should be 
added to the others given to the 
Blessed Mary: ''Queen of the Most 
Holy Rosary, pray for us." 

He further ordered that a Brief in 
regard to this matter be issued : all 
things to the contrary notwithstanding. 
Dec. 10, 1883. 

D. CARD. BARTOLINI, S. R. C. Prefect. 


As a special confirmation of the preceding decree of the Sacred 
Congregation of Rites, His Holiness issued a Brief on the subject. 
From this Brief we quote a few passages : 

{From the Brief Salutaris, dated Christinas Eve, 1883. " Queen of the Most 
Holy Rosary ! " Vol. II., p. 97. set/.] 

"That salutary 'spirit of prayer/ at once the gift and the pledge 
of the Divine Mercy, which God promised of old to pour forth 
' upon the house of David and upon the dwellers in Jerusa- 
lem/ although it never ceases to exist in the Catholic Church, 
becomes, however, more active in moving souls whenever it is 
felt that some great crisis for the Church or for the State has 
arrived, or is approaching. For faith and devotion towards God 
is usually excited when apprehension is rife, because the less 
there is to be hoped for from the protection of man, the greater 
is seen to be our need of the support of heaven. Of this we 
have had proof but lately, when, troubled at the long vexations 
of the Church and the difficult state of affairs, we appealed to 
tne piety of Christians in our late Encyclical Letter, in which 
We decreed that the Virgin Mary should be venerated and her in- 
tercession implored, throughout the whole month of October, by 
the recitation of the most holy Rosary. We are aware that Our 
will was obeyed with an ardor and readiness, commensurate with 
the holiness of the matter and the gravity of the cause. And 
not only in this Our own land of Italy, but in all lands were 
supplications offered up for the Catholic cause and the public 
welfare ; and, led by the authority of the bishops and by the 
example and action of the clergy, all vied in rendering honor to 
the great Mother of God. 

Among the various methods and forms of prayer which are 
devoutly and profitably used in the Catholic Church, that which 
is called the Rosary of Mary is on many grounds to be 
specially recommended. And amongst others, as We have in- 
sisted in Our Encycical Letter, is this weighty reason, that the 
Rosary was instituted principally to implore the protection of 
the Mother of God against the enemies of the Catholic name, 
and, as every one knows, has often been signally effectual in 
delivering the Church from calamities. It is therefore not 
only responsive to the devotion of private persons, but also 
to the public needs of the times, to have this method of prayer 
restored to that place of honor which it long held, when 
no Christian family would suffer a day to pass without the 



recitation of the Rosary. For these reasons, We exhort and 
beseech all to persist religiously and constantly in the daily 
use of the Rosary ; and We declare it to be Our wish that in 
the principal church of each diocese it should be iccited daily, 
and that in all churches to which a district is attached, it 
should be said on every day of obligation. And in stimulat- 
ing and maintaining this pious exercise, the Religious Order?, 
and especially by a kind of right the Dominicans, will be 
able to be of great use ; and we hold it for certain that they 
will not be wanting in the fulfilment of so fruitful and 
noble a service. 

To the honor, therefore, of Mary, the great Mother of God ; 
for a perpetual remembrance of the prayers for protection 
offered among all nations throughout the month of October to 
Her most pure heart ; as an enduring testimony of the un- 
bounded trust which we put in^ our most loving Mother ; and 
in order that we may day by day more and more obtain her 
kindly aid, We will and decree that in the Litany of Loretto, 
after the invocation, 'Queen conceived without original sin,' 
shall be added the suffrage ' Queen of the most Iioly 
Rosary, pray for us.' " 

The next document in the order of time is the decree of the 
S. Congregation of Rites, issued June 19, 1884. (THE PASTOR 
Vol. II., p. 339 ) As previously stated in this paper, a special 
privilege was thereby granted the feast of the Solemnity of the 
Holy Rosary, in virtue of which this secondary feast would yield 
in occurrence to no feast, even to a primary, of the same rite, 
major double. 

On the thirtieth of August of the following year, 1884, His 
Holiness again reverted to the subject of the Holy Rosary, and 
issued the encyclical Superiore anno. As this was inserted in 
THE PASTOR in small type, (Vol. II., p. 366 seq.} and in the 
original Latin only, it will not be thought waste of space to insert 
the translation here in more legible type : 

Venerable Brethren, Health and Apostolic Blessing ! 

By our Encyclical of lust year we decreed, as you are each 


aware, that throughout the entire Catholic world the great Mother 
of God should be especially venerated during the whole month 
of October by the recitation of the Rosary, to the end that 
she might obtain relief for the struggling Church. In doing this 
we only followed the dictates of our own judgment, as well as 
the example of our predecessors. These always had recourse to 
the august Virgin, whenever the Church was in face of particu- 
larly trying circumstances, and, by arousing devotion to her and 
most earnest supplications, they sought to obtain the desired 

So cheerfully and generally did Catholics, the world over, re- 
spond to .the wishes we expressed last year in regard to the 
Rosary devotions of October, that there can be no question of 
the great zeal for religion and piety, which animates the Catholic 
world, or of the great confidence with which all look to the 
protection of the Virgin Mary. And indeed this manifestation of 
faith and fervor has afforded us,- we confess no small measure 
of consolation, burdened as we are with such a weight of an- 
noyances and afflictions. It has not only gladdened us, but given 
us heart to endure still bitterer things, if such be the will of 
God. For, while the spirit of prayer is poured out over the 
house of David and over the dwellers in Jerusalem, we are per- 
suaded that God will at length show mercy, take pity on the 
condition of his Church, and hearken to the cries of those who 
are beseeching him in the name of her whom he himself con- 
stituted the dispenser of all celestial favors. 

Wherefore, Venerable Brethren, since the same motives still exist 
which moved us last year, as we have said, to stirring up the 
people to piety, we deem it our duty this year, also, to exhort 
all Catholics to keep on and persevere in these Rosary devotions, 
and so merit the powerful protection of the Mother of God. 
For, as the enemies of the Christian religion battle against it 
with such persistency, there should be in the defenders of re- 
ligion a persistency just as unflagging ; especially when it is 
remembered that the divine assistance and favors from on high 
are ordinarily granted us only as the reward of perseverance. 
And in this connection it will be well to call to mind the ex- 
ample of that great woman Judith, who prefigured the Blessed 
Virgin. Judith rebuked the foolish impatience of the Jews for 
having dared to set a day, according to their own notions, on 
which Jehovah should come to the relief of the besieged city. 


(Judith viii. 11. seq.} We may also take a lesson from the 
Apostles, who, while awaiting the promised gift of the Holy Ghost, 
spent the time praying, all together, \\ith Mary the Mother of Jesus. 
As in those cases, the business before us now is also one of supreme 
importance. It is that of dragging down from his height of place 
at the head of his forces our ancient foe and our wiliest ; it 
is that of recovering the liberties of the Church and of her 
head ; it is that of maintaining and defending those foundations on 
which must rest civil society for its safety and well-being. We 
should therefore see to it in these troublous days for the Church, 
that the pious custom of devoutly reciting the Rosary be anx- 
iously persevered in: and the more especially, because the Rosary 
calls to mind in rotation all the mysteries of our redemption, and 
is in the highest decree calculated to foster a spirit of piety. 

As regarus Italy ! now in very deed exists the need of im- 
ploring through these Rosary devotions the protection of the 
mighty Virgin : for Italy is now not merely threatened wiih 
a fancied calamity, but she is face to face with a dread reality. 
The Asiatic cholera has by divine permission overleaped the 
bounds which nature seems to have set it, has appeared jn 
some of the most noted seaports of France, and thence passed 
into the neighboring provinces of Italy. To Mary then it be- 
hooves us to have recourse, to her who is properly and appro- 
priately styled by the Church health-giver, help-bearer, and 
health - preserver ' that she may deign to grant to those prayers 
which find most favor in her eyes the 'aid we implore, and 
drive this vile pest far from our shores. 

Wherefore, for the approaching month of October, a month 
consecrated to Rosary devotions throughout the world, we 
have decided to prescribe all that was prescribed last year. We 
decree, therefore, and order, that from the first day of October 
to the second of the ensuing November five decades at least 
of the beads, followed by the litany of the Blessed Virgin, shall 
be daily recited in all parish churches and in public chapels 
dedicated to God's Mother, as also in any others designated 
by the ordinary. If these devotions take place in the morning, 
mass is to be said in conjunction with the prayers: if in the 
evening, the Blessed Sacrament is to be exposed and benediction 
given. We further desire that sodalities of the Holy Rosary go 

i " Ad earn, quam jure meritoque salutiferam, opiferam, sospitatricem 
appellat Ecclesia." 


in religious processions through the public streets, where per- 
mitted to do so by the civil authorities. 

And to unlock the spiritual treasures of the Church to 
Christian piety, we now renew all the indulgences we granted 
last year, to wit: an indulgence of seven years and seven 
quarantines, each time, to all who are present at the public 
.recitation of the Rosary and pray for our intention; and the 
same to those who recite it privately, when prevented by rea- 
sonable cause from going to the church. Further, we grant a 
plenary indulgence out of the treasures of the Church to all 
who, within the time specified, assist at the public recitation of 
the beads ten times, and the same to persons who say the 
Rosary ten times at home when prevented by reasonable cause 
from attending the public devotions, provided the parties in 
each case go to confession and receive holy communion. We 
grant also the fullest pardon and remission of penalties to all 
who, on the feast itself of the holy Rosary, or on any day 
within the octave, go to confession and receive holy communion, 
and pray in some church or oratory to God and his most holy 
Mother for our intention. 

Finally, in favor of those who live in the country and are 
engaged in agriculture, and who are generally very busy during 
the month of October, we hereby permit that the afore-said 
devotions may be postponed at the discretion of the ordinary to 
November or even to December, and that, in this case, the 
October indulgences mentioned above will be equally gainable 
in these later months. 

We are persuaded, Venerable Brethren, that tlie rich and 
plentiful fruits of these October devotions will be commensurate 
with the care we bestow on them, and that, where we plant 
and your zeal water, God in his bounty will furnish the 
heavenly increase. We regard it as certain that the people will 
comply with the commands of our Apostolic authority with that 
same eager zeal and piety of which we had ample testimony 
last year. And may our Patroness on high, invoked by these 
Rosary devotions, be propitious and grant that dissensions may 
cease, that the Christian religion may be restored to its proper 
place in all countries, and that we may obtain of God the 
desired tranquillity for holy Church, 

Given at Rome, this thirtieth day of August. 1884, 



The next document in the order of dates is that beginning 
with the words Inter plunmos, dated Aug. 20, 1885. (THE 
PASTOR Vol. IV, p. 26.) In this decree Urbis el Orbis the 
command is laid on clergy and people to go on celebrating the 
October devotions, established originally in 1883 by the Encyclical 
Supremi Apostolatus, and to continue to keep the month of 
October as a month of special devotion to Mary, "Queen of 
the Most Holy Rosary," until the Supreme Pontiff again regain 
that freedom of action and independence necessary to the 
proper discharge of the duties devolving on the Apostolic See. 
This decree recalls to mini .what was stated in the original 
Encyclical, namely, that the main object of these October devo- 
tions is to obtain of God such a settlement of the political 
difficulties in Italy, as will assure complete liberty to the Sov- 
ereign Pontiff. A secondary object, no doubt, is to keep alive 
in the minds of Catholics the necessity of that liberty, and to 
keep alive their aspirations for its recovery. Of the existence of 
these aspirations and hopes, the letters addressed by the hier- 
archy to Leo XIII. from all parts of the world, as well as the 
replies of the Holy Father bear witness. Thus, to quote one or 
two out of many, the following passage is found 'in the joint letter 
of the Swiss bishops, dated Aug. 26, 1887: " Utinam exurgat 
nunc Deus et dissipentur inimici ejus! Plena libertas tua tem- 
poraleque Petri Patrimonium, quod necessarium est ad regendos 
populos commissos, brevi tibi vindicetur, et omnia fausta felici- 
aque, ad majorem divinae Majestatis gloriam et ad salutem 
animarum, tibi eveniant!" And in the Holy Father's reply we 
read: " Testimonium dilectionis et obsequii vestri, Venerabiles 
Fratres et dilecti Filii, jucundissimum extitisse nobis profitemur ; 
jucundissima etiam vota vestra, quibus nostra apud Deum adjici- 
mus enixe rogantes, ut pax restituatur Ecclesiae, libertas et jura 
Apostolicae Sedis ab omni injuria vindicentur, ac labores curaeque 
nostrae, in bonum humani generis et gloriam divini Nominis, 
secundo exitu fortunentur." Dated Sept. 3, 1887. And in an 
address to the Holy Father, on occasion of his Jubilee, the 
illustrious Prince Primate, Cardinal Simor, in his own name, 
in that of his colleagues of the episcopate, and in that of the 
Hungarian people, thus eloquently speaks: 

" Historia, fugientium testis temporum, vitas, qui doceri volunt, 
magistra, custos rerum gestarum, eruditae posteritati, mendacio 
profligate, rejecto, lumen adferens quemadmodum in nostris 


publicis regni tabulis consignatum legitur, annunciat : quia per 
Sanctam Tuam Sedem, Beatissime Pater, bonis omnibus repleti 

" Pro Te, non dominationis fulgorem, sed supremse, qua com- 
modo totius orbis fungeris, auctoritatis dignitatem et securitatem 
inique ablatam juste exigis ; non regibus, non gentibus vis 
principari, sed ut Christus Dominus et Salvator, et justitia ejus 
in gentibus regnet, concupiscis ; nulli nocere, cunctis prodesse, 
nullum premere, cunctos pariter extollere niteris, quum justitia 
elevet gentes, miseros autem faciat populos peccatum. Tu princeps 
pacis, consilia pads meditaris, sacerdos Christo Domino, genti- 
bus autem et regibus Pater, manere Tuae voluntatis est. 

" Si rebus humanis vocatus intervenis, nunquam ficto pectore 
facis, semper Justus, semper benignus, inopem foves, erigis, 
tueris, limite officii signato, corda pulsas, affectus mulces, 
paciferaque manu ramum praetendis olivae." 

Nor are the prelates of the United States less hopeful or less 
in earnest, as may be gathered from decree n. 48 of the 
Second Plenary Council renewed in the Third Plenary. In 
decreeing the annual collection for Peter's pence the fathers 
say: " Hae autem collectae fient singulis annis per omnes nos- 
tras provincias ; donee Summus Pontifex in jura sua feliciter 
restitutus, vel alia ratione a divina Providentia sublevatus, amplius 
ejusmodi haud indigeat auxilio." 

As the devotions prescribed in the decree of the Sacred Con- 
gregation of Rites, Inter plurimos, (IV. 26.) are the same as 
those prescribed in the Encyclicals already quoted, and the 
indulgences and the conditions for gaining them are also the 
same, we need only quote from the decree what is peculiar to 
itself : 

" Wherefore, for this and all coming years, as long as the 
present tribulations of the Church last, and until full liberty be 
restored to the Sovereign Pontiff, and until the Church Univer- 
sal can render thanks to God for this_ liberty regained, so long 
shall the Church Universal celebrate the Solemnity of Our Lady of 
the Rosary, each month of October, as during the past two' 
years. His Holiness, therefore, etc." This decree is dated 
August 20, 1885. 

The words used leave no doubt of the obligation to have 
these devotions in all parish churches, ecclesiis curialibus de- 


cernit itaque el mandat and leave no doubt, besides, of the 
special purpose of the devotions. Of this purpose, it is un- 
questionably our duty to remind the people from time to 
time, but especially in the latter days of September and fre- 
quently during the month of October. Whoever fails in this 
is but half performing the duty imposed on him. 

Another decree Urbis el Orbis concerning the October devo- 
tions was issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, August 
26, 1886, THE PARTOR vol. iv. p. 382. This decree, begin- 
ning with the words Post edilas, announces that, notwithstanding 
the jubilee of that year, the indulgences for the October devotions 
remain, and, adds that bishops, far from relaxing their efforts 
owing to the jubilee, should redouble them in that year of bles- 
sings, to induce those committed to their care to be more than ever 
faithful and fervent in the Rosary devotions, devotions to be 
continued from year to year " quoadusque tristissima perdurent 
adjuncta, in quibus versatur Catholica Ecclesia, ac de restituta 
Pontifici Maximo plena libertate Deb referre gratias datum non sit." 
The decree also so far modifies the prescription of the Encyclicals, 
which require benediction to be given at the close of the 
devotions, if held in the evening, as to permit that in lieu of 
the benediction proper with exposition of the Blessed Sacrament 
in the remonstrance, it will suffice in the poorer churches and 
oratories to open the tabernacle, and, after the usual functions 
of benediction and the singing of the Tantum Ergo, with its 
prayer, to give the benediction with the ciborium. 

Confirmando iterum Sanctitas Sua His Holiness, . renewing in all 

in omnibus sacras indulgentias ac priv- things the sacrerl indulgences nml 

ilegia, quse in prrecitato decreto con- privileges enumerated in the fore- 

cessa sunt, indulgere insuper dignata going decree, Inter Plurimos (iv. 26.) 

est, ut in lis templis, seu oratoriis, ubi has further deigned to grant that, 

ob eorum paupertatem, exposito cum where, as in poor churches and ora- 

Sanctissimo Eucharistise Sacramento, ad lories, the prescribed solemn bene- 

tramitem decreti ipsius, solemni modo diction with the remonstrance cannot 

mempe per ostensonum fieri baud be conveniently given, it will suffice, 

valeat, eadem per modum exceptionis with the approval of the bishop, to 

peragi possit, prudenti judicio ordi- open the door of the tabernacle, and 

narii, cum sacra pyxide, aperiendo at the end of the devotions give bene- 

scilicet ab initio ostiolum ciborii, et diction wilh the ciborium. 
cum ea (pyxide^ populum in fine bene- 
dicendo. Die 26 Augusti, 1886. 

This decree, strictly interpreted, seems to require no choir, 
no singing of Tantum Ergo, no incense, nothing but the sur- 


plice, stole, and humeral veil. The beads and litany are said 
in presence of the opened tabernacle, and then benediction is 
given with the ciborium. To act on this decree, however, 
the approbation of the bishop must be had, wtfich will, of 
course, be refused to churches that can have benediction in 
proper form. 

Finally the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, 
Urbis et Orbis, dated Sept. nth, 1887, (Infer densas, THE PASTOR 
VOL. V., p. 365.) renews all former concessions, prescribes the 
continuance of the October devotions, " that God may put down 
the enemies of religion, and restore to the billow-tossed mystic 
bark of Peter the tranquillity so longingly desired," and raises 
the Feast of the Solemnity of the Holy Rosary from a major 
double to a double of the second class in universa Ecclesia, et 
''ita quidem ut non possit transferri ad alium diem nisi occur- 
rente officio potioris ritus." 

[// will be well to keep this number of THE PASTOR handy for 
May and October. Tantum sci'mus, quantum memoria tenemus\. 


As far as the question of authority is concerned, no difficulty 
of importance can be raised. 

John Baptist Gaston, third son of Henry IV., of France, and 
brother of Louis III., (1608-1660,) married without the rcyal 
consent. Urban VIII. \vas appealed to, and requested, on that 
ground, to declare the marriage null. The Holy Father an- 
swered that "the special laws of the French kingdom could 
not affect a sacrament which has Christ for its author, and is 
subject solely to him and the canons of the Church. Let the 
civil effects be whatsoever they may, the bond is indissoluble." ' 

Carriere thinks that, if the special Gallic legislation, which 
then amounted to a custom, were made known to the Pontiff, 
he would have acceded to the requests. 

Now it is historically untrue that this argument was not 

1 Feije, De Impediments, n. 22. 


made; and, even if it were not used, the action of the head of 
the Church would have been the same. For, the Pope insists, in 
his answer, on the sacramental character of the bond and its 
independence of civil legislation. 

Benedict XIV. denies that the impediment to marriage be- 
tween Jews and Christians derives its binding power from Theo- 
dosian legislation, "because," says the Pontiff, "lay princes have 
no authority in matrimonial matters." 

Carriere contends that the Constitution Singulari nobis by no 
means ends the controversy, as Benedict XIV., in that constitu- 
tion, touches the matter incidentally only. A mere perusal of 
the text will remove that objection : 

"Lex unica quae ad hanc rem pertineat Theodosii est, quse 
incipit : Ne gut's, sub titulo codicis, De Judceis. Verum duae 
hie occurrunt clifficultates : prima, quod haec lex, utpote a laico 
princips condita, nullam habere vim in matrimoniis debet : Leges 
illce quomodocumque intellects non possunt pr&scribere Ealesice. Sic 
Estius. Gravior altera est. Nam Theodosii lege, Hebisei cum 
Christiana matrimonium, ob sceleris indignitatem, non quidem 
ut irritum sed ut adulterimn, seveiissime damnabatur. Leges 
autem imperatoris dicendum est, dicta matrimonia ut adulteria punire 
propter graviiatem peccati, non propler nullitaiem matrimonii. Idem 
Estius.'' Benedict XIV. Bui Ian um, Const. Singulari nobis, 

The Theodosian law assumed to decide nothing as to the 
validity of the marriage, but decreed that the penalties meted 
to adulterers shall be also meted to the actors in such a mar- 
riage : "Si quis hujusmocli admiserit, adulterii vice commissi 
hujusmodi crimen obtinebunt." 

Hence it is quite certain that Benedict XIV. denies to lay 
governments all authority to constitute diriment impediments. It 
may be added, that Sovereign Pontiffs are not wont to speak 
incidentally, and at the same time clearly and positively, on 
important subjects. 

To the official utterances of Benedict m':st be added, also, the 
great weight of his authority as a private doctor. There is no 
mistaking Benedict's views, in regard to constituting diriment 
impediments : " Neque in epsicopi potestate est, novum statuere 
impedimentum dirimens, quod a solo Summo Ponlifice potest 
induci." De Syn. xii., v., 2. (See also Ib. viii., xii., 6 ; ix., 
ix., 3 seq. y et cap. xi., n. 4.) 


The historic argument, in regard to which there is indeed 
little difficulty, may be resumed by quoting the words of a 
letter, written Sept 16, 1788, by Pius VI. The circumstances 
that evoked the letter were these: In a marriage cause, heard 
in the curia of the archbishop of Naples, judgment was given 
for the invalidity of the contract. An appeal was taken, not 
to the Holy See, but to the royal court. The king received 
the appeal and deputed a bishop, who was more of a courtier 
than a scholar, to rehear the case in his (the king's) name, and 
decide accoiding to the merits. The case was retried. This 
matter coming to the ears of Pius VI.. he addressed a let- 
ter of sharp reproval to the erring bishop, from which it will 
be sufficient to quote: " Ita ut quoties principes saeculi leges 
condiderunt, quae has causas spectarent, hoc ipsum praestiterint 
uti meri executores et defensores legum ecclesiasticarum, sacras 
per omnia sequentes regulas, declarando nolle se suis sanc- 
tionibus complecti ac comprehendere id quod respicit rationem ?a- 
cramenti seu substantiam contractus, qui materia sacramenti proxima 
est, sou effectus ecclesiasticos. Verum ipse non solum delegationi 
ultro libenteique assensum praebuisti tuum, non solum illam 
probasti ac cumulasti laudibus, sed tanquam reginus delegatus 
ausus es solvere sacramenti \inculum, et id glorias duxisti tuae, 
ut in causis nullitatis matrimonii tribueres laicis potestatibus 
auctoritatem leges dicendi de nuptiis, auctoritatem, inquam, 
quam' saeculi ipsae potestates sibi arrogarunt nunquam : hoc 
enim jus, qua late patet orbis Catholicus, in sola Ecclesia residet 
universum." Apud Feije, n. 32. 

This bishop affirmed the decision of the archbishop's court. 
What incensed the Pope was that, as a representative of the king, 
he should assume to hear the case at all. As deputy of the 
king his act was the king's act, and he officially recognized the 
right of the secular power to define what constitutes the matter of 
a sacrament. The Saviour gave all such business to his Church, 
not to the secular authorities. (Cf. Cone. Trid. c. xii. De flfa/r.) 

For the rest, the question, Have secular authorities any 
power either to constitute diriment impediments, or decide ma- 
trimonial cases in which the existence of the spiritual vinculum 
is involved ? is no longer discussed within the Church. The 
learned Carriere, of St. Sulpice, was the last theologian of any 
note, who, to some little extent, favored the affirmative side. 
But Carriere published over fifty years ago. (Paris, 1837.) His 


work was condemned. He retracted. And there we may 
well leave the matter. The question will never be raised again. 
The dogmatic utterances of Gregory, Pius, and Leo have definitely 
laid that ghost. Whoever is curious to see the sophistry em- 
ployed by Carriere to make plausible arpurrentation, and to see 
the sophistry neatly unmasked, can consult Feije, De Impediments. 




[Not the least, nor the least arduous of F. Konings' services to the 
Church in the United States was his Commentarium in Facilitates Apos- 
tolicas. It is a work indispensable to diocesan officials, and one which no 
rector who cares to know his duties can afford to be without. In future 
numbers we shall have frequent occasion to refer to the Faculties and to 
Father Konings Commentary.] 

1. " Conferendi Ordines extra tempera et non servatis inter- 
stitiis usque ad presbyteratum incl., si sacerdotum necessitas ibi 

2. " Dispensandi in quibuscumque irregularitatibus, exceptis 
illis, quae vel ex bigamia veia, vel ex homicidio voluntario 
proveniunt ; et in his etiam duobus casibus, si prsecisa necessitas 
operariorum ibi fuerit, si tamen, quoad homicidium voluntarium, 
ex hujusmodi dispensatione scandalum non oriatur." 

3. " Dispensandi super defectu setatis unius anni ob operari- 
orum penuriam, ut promoveri possint ad sacerdotium, si alias 
idonei fuerint." 

4. " Dispensandi et commutandi vota simplicia in alia pia 
opera, et dispensandi ex rationabili causa in votis simplicibus 
castitatis et religionis." 

5. " Absolvendi et dispensandi in quacumque simonia ; et in 
reali, dimissis beneficiis, et super fructibus male perceptis injuncta 
aliqua eleempsyna vel poenitentia salutari arbitrio dispensantis, 
vel etiam retentis beneficiis, si fuerint parochialia et non sint 
qui parochiis prsefici posint. " 

6. " Dispensandi in 30. et 4 C - consanguinitatis et affinitatis 
gradu simplici et mixto tantum, et in 2. 3. et 4. mixtis, 


non tamen in 2. solo quoad fulura iratrimonia ; quod vero 
ad prceLrita, etiam in 2. solo, duminodo nullo modo attingat 
piimum graduin, cum his qui nb haeresi vel infidelitate conver- 
tuntur ad Fidetn Catholicam, et in pisefatis casibus prolem 
susceptam declarandi legitimam." 

7. " Dispensandi super impediment publicae honestatis justis 
ex sponsalibus proveniente. " 

8. "Dispensandi super impedimento criminis, neutro tamen 
conjugum machinante, et restituendi jus amissum petendi debitum. " 

9. ' Dispensandi in impedimento cognationis spiritualis prae- 
teiquam inter levantem et levatum. " 

10. " Hae vero dispensationes matrimoniales, videlicet 6 a , 7*, 8 a , 
et 9*, non concedantur, nisi cum clausula : dummodo mulier rapta 
non fuer it, vel si rnf.ta futril, in potentate raptor is non exist at ' : et 
in dispensatione tenor hujusmodi facultatum inseratur, cum ex- 
pressione temporis ad quod fuerint concessae." 

11. "Dispensandi cum gentilibus et infidelibus plures uxores 
habentibus, ut post conversionem et baptismum, quam ex illis 
malueiint, si etiam ipsa fidelis fiat, retinere possint, nisi prima 
voluerit converti." 

12. " Confieiendi Olea Sacra cum sacerdotibus, quos potuerint 
habere et. si necessitas urgeat, etiam extra diem Coenas Domini. " 

13. " Delegandi simplicibus sacerdotibus potestatem benedicendi 
paramenta et alia utensilia ad Sacrificium Missae necessaria, ubi 
non intervenit sacra unctio ; et reconciliandi ecclesias pollutas 
aqua ab episcopo benedicta, et, in casu necessitatis, etiam aqua 
non benedicta ab episcopo." 

14. " Largiendi ter in anno indulgentiam plenariam contritis, 
confessis ac sacra cummunione refectis." 

15. '' Ab-olvendi ab haeresi et apostasia a fide et a schismate 
quoscumque etiam ecclesiasticos tarn saeculares quam regu'ares ; 
non tamen eos qui ex locis fuerint ubi Sanctum Oflkium 
exercetur, nisi in locis missionum, in quibus impune grassantur 
haereses, deliquerint, nee illos qui judicialiter abjuraverint, nisi 
isti nati sint ubi impune grassantur haereses, et post judicialem 
abjurationem illuc reversi in haeresim fuerint relapsi, et hos in 
foro conscientise tantum." 

1 6. "Absolvendi ab omnibus censuris in Constitutione ' Apos- 
toliccE Sedis modtrationi,' 1 dd. 12. Oct. 1 869, Romano Pontifici etiam 
special i modo reservatis, excepta absolutione complicis in peccato 


17. ''Concedendi indulgentiam plenariam primo conversis 
ab haeresi atque etiam fidelibus quibuscumque in articulo mortis 
saltern contritis, si confiteri non poterunt." 

1 8. " Concedendi indulgentiam plenariam. in oratione 40. 
horarum ter anno indicenda diebus episcopo bene visis, contritis 
et confessis et sacra communione refectis, si tamen ex concursu 
populi et expositione SSmi. Sacramenti nulla probabilis suspicio 
sit sacrilegii ab hsereticis et infidelibus aut offensionis a magis- 

19. " Lucrandi sibi e \sdem indulgentias. " 

20. "Singulis feriis secundis non impeditis oflicio ix. lecti- 
onum, vel eis impeditis, die immediate sequenti, celebrandi 
missam de requie, in quocumque altari, etiam portatili, et liber- 
andi animas secundum eorum intentionem a purgatorii pcenis 
per modum suffragii." 

21. " Tenend et legendi, non tamen aliis concedendi, praeter- 
quam ad tempus tamen iis sacerdotibus, quos praecipue idoneos 
atque honestos esse sciat, libros prohibitos, exceptis operibus 
Dupuy, Volney, M. Reghellini, Pigault le Brun, De Potter, 
Bontham, J. A. Dulaure, Fetes et Courtisanes de la Grece, No- 
velle del. Casti, et aliis operibus de obscoenis et contra religio- 
nem ex professo tractantibus." 

22. " Piaeficiendi parochiis regulares, eisque suos deputandi 
vicarios in defectu saecularium, de consensu tamen suorum 

23. " Celebrandi bis in die, si necessitas urgeat, ita tamen 
ut in prima Missa non sumpserit ablutionem, per unam horam 
ante auroram et aliam post meridiem, sine ministro, et sub dio 
et sub terra, in loco tamen decenti, etiamsi altare sit fractum 
vel sine reliquiis sanctorum, et praesentibus haereticis, schismati- 
cis, infidelibus et excommunicatis, si aliter celebrari non possit. 
Caveat vero, ne praedicta facultate seu dispensatione celebrandi 
bis in die aliter quam ex gravissimis causis et rarissime utatur, 
in quo graviter ipsius conscientia oneratur. Quod si hanc 
eamdem facultatem alter! sacerdoti juxta potestatem inferius 
apponendam communicare, aut causas utendi alicui, qui a 
Sancta Sede hanc facultatem obtmuent, approbare visum fuerit, 
serio ipsius conscientiae injungitur, ut paucis dumtaxat iisque 
maturioris prudentiae ac zeli et qui absolute 'necessarii sunt, nee 
pro quolibet loco, sed ubi gravis necessitas tulerit, et ad 
breve tempus eamdem ^communicet aut respective causas approbet." 


24. " Deferendi SSmum Sacramentum occulte ad infirmos 
sine lumine, illudque sine eodem retinendi pro eisdem in- 
firmis, in loco tamen decenti, si ab haereticis aut infidelibus sit 
periculum sacrilegii/' 

25. " Induendi se vestibus saecularibus, si aliter vel transire ad 
loca eorum curse commissa vel in eis permanere non poterunt." 

25- " Recitandi rosarium vel alias preces si breviarium secum 
deferre non poterunt, vel divinum officium ob aliquod legitimum 
impedimentum recitare non valeant." 

27. " Dispensandi, quando expedire videbitur, super esu car- 
nium, ovorum et lacticiniorum tempore jejuniorum et Quadiagesimae." 

28. '' Praedictas facultates communicandi, non tamen illas, qu^j 
requirunt Ordinem episcopalem, vel non sine Sacrorum Oleorum 
usu exercentur, sacerdotibus idoneis qui in eorum dioecesibus 
laborabunt, et proesertim tempore sui obitus, ut, sede vacante, 
sit qui possit supplere, donee Sedes Apostolica certior facta, 
quod quam primum fieri debebit, per delegatos vel per unum 
ex iis alio modo provideat, quibus delegatis auctoritate Aposto- 
lica facultas conceditur, sede vacante et in casu necessitatis, conse- 
crandi calices, patenas et altaria portatilia Sacris Oleis, ab epis- 
copo tamen benedictis." 

29. " Et praedictae facultates gratis et sine ulla mercede 
exerceantur, nee illis uti possint extra fines suse dioecesis." 


1. "Recitandi privatim, legitima concurrente causa, matutinum 
cum laudibus diei sequentis statim elapsis duabus horis post 
meridiem, eamdemque facultatem ecclesiasticis viris sive sascu- 
laribus, sive regularibus communicandi." 

2. " Retinendi ac legendi libros ab Apostolica Sede prohibitos, 
etiam contra Religionem ex professo agentes, ad effectum eos 
mpugnandi ; quos tamen diligenter custodial ne ad aliorum 
manus perveniant, exceptis astrologicis, judiciariis, superstitiosis ac 
obsccenis ex professo ; eamdemque facultatem etiam aliis con- 
cedendi, parce tamen et dummftdo prudenter praesumeie possit 
nullum eos ex hujusmodi lectione detrimentum esse passuros." 

3. " Dispensandi cum diaconis utriusque cleri super defectu 
aetatis quatuordecim mensium, ut promoveri possint ad sacerdo- 
tium, si alias idonei fuerint." 


4. " Permittendi parochis sibi subjectis. dummodo justa et 
legitima causa concurrat, ut iis diebus festis, quibus fideles 
Apostolica auctoritate soluti sunt ab obligaiione Missam audiendi, 
ipsi ab applicatione pro populo abstinere valeant, dummodo pro 
eodem populo in ejusmodi Missa specialiter orent. " 

5. " Permittendi Catholicis sibi subjectis, ut feriis sextis, Sab- 
batis aliisque diebus, quibus carnium esus vetatur, acatholicis, si 
in eorum mensa esse contigerit, carnes praebere valeant, dummodo 
tamen absit ecclesiastic legis contemptus et ejusmodi facultate 
sobrie multaque circumspectione utantur, ne scandalum in Catho- 
licos vel heterodoxos ingeratur." 

6. " Deputandi aliquem sacerdotem in locis sibi subjectis cum 
facultate consecrandi, juxta formam in Pontificali Romano prae- 
scriptam, calices, patenas, et altarium lapides, abhibitis tamen Sacris 
Oieis ab episcopo Catholico benedictis." 

7. " Impertiendi quater in anno intra fines suse dioecesis in 
solemnioribus festis Benedictionem Papalem, juxta for mu lam typis 
impressam atque insertam, cum indulgentia plenaria ab iis lucranda, 
qui vere poenitentes, confessi ac sacra communione refecti eidem 
Benedictioni interfuerint, Deumque pro Sanctos Fidei propagatione 
et S. R. E. exaltatione oraverint." 

8. " Declarandi privilegiatum in qualibet ecclesia snae dioecesis 
unum altare, dummodo aliud privilegiatum non adsit, pro cunctis 
Mis^ae Sacrificiis, quae in eodem altari celebrabunlur a quocunque 
presbytero saeculari vel cujusvis ordinis regulari. " 

9. " Benedicendi coronas precatorias, cruces, sacra numismata 
iisque applicandi indulgentias juxta folium t^pis impressum atque 
insertum, necnon erigendi confraternitates B. M. V. de Monte 
Carmelo, SSmi. Rosarii et Bonae Mortis cum applicatione omnium 
indulgentiarum et privilegiorum, quse Summi Pontifices iisdem 
confraternitatibus impertiti sunt ; addita insuper -potestate has 
facultates communicandi presbyteris sacro ministerio fungentibus/' 

10. "Erigendi in locis suae dicecesis, in quibus non adsint PP. 
Franciscales, pitim exercitium Viae Oucis cum applicatione omnium 
indulgentiarum et privilegiorum, quae Summi Pontifices ejusmodi 
exercitium peragentibus impertiti sunt, addita insuper potestate 
hanc facultatem communicandi ^presbyteris sacro ministerio fun- 

n. " Prom oven di clericos sibi subditos ad subdiaconatum ali- 
csque Ordines Majores usque ad presbyteratum inclusive titulo 
Missionis, praestito tamen ab eisdem clericis juramento antequam 


subdiaconi ordinentur, quo spondeant ad instar Pontificiorum 
alumnorum, suae dioecesi vel mission! se esse perpstuo inservituros." 

12. " Delegandi benedictionem campanarurn quandocumque earn 
ipsi absque gravi incommodo perficere nequeant, sacerdotibus sibi 
bene visis, servato ritu Pontificalis Romani, atque adhibitis Oleis 
et aqua ab episcopo benedictis ; necnon sine aqua ab episcopo 
benedicta, si gravis causa concurrat." 

13. " Et praedictae facultates gratis et sine ulla mercede exer- 
ceantur, nee illis uti possit extra fines suae dioecesis. 


1. " Dispensandi super impedimento cognationis spiritualis inter 
levantem et levatum." 

2. "Dispensandi in casibus occultis et in foro conscientiae tan- 
turn super prime et secundo gradu simplici et mixto affinitatis 
ex copula illicita provenientis, in linea sive collateral! sive etiam 
recta, dummodo, si de linea recta agatur, nullum subsit dubium 
quod conjux possit esse proles ab altero contrahentium genita, 
tam in matrimoniis scienter vel ignoranter contractis, quam in 

3. " Di?pensandi cum subditis, exceptis Italis de quibus non 
constat Italicum domicilium omnino deseruisse, atque excepto 
insuper casu Matrimonii cum viro vel muliere Judaeis, super 
impedimento dispantatis cultus, quatenus sine contumelia Creatoris 
fieri possit, et dummodo cautum omnino sit conditionibus ab 
Ecclesia praescriptis ac praesertim de amovendo a Catholico 
conjuge perversioms periculo, deque conversione conjugis infidelis 
pro viribus curanda, ac de univtrsa prole utriusque sexus in 
Catholicae religionis sanctitate omnino educanda : servata in 
reliquis adjecta Instructione typis impressa." 

4. " Di-pensandi cum suis subditis, exceptis Italis de quibus 
non constat Italicum domicilium omnino deseruisse, super impe- 
dimento impediente l\tix/& religionis, dummodo cautum omnino 
sit conditionibus ab Ecclesia prsescriptis ; prout in superior! No. 3." 

5. " Dispensandi in matrjmoniis mixtis jam contract!?, non 
item in contrahendis super gradibus consanguinitatis et affinitatis, 
super quibus Apostolicam facult.item pro Catholicis jam obtinuit, 
quatenus pars Catholica, praevia absolutione ab incestus reatu et 
censuris, cum parte acatholica rite et legitime matrimonium 


contrahere de novo possit, prolesque suscepta ac suscipienda 
legitima declarari, dummodo cautum omnino sit conditionibus 
ab Ecclesia praescriptis, prout in superiori No. 3." 

6. " Sanandi in radice matrimonia contracta, quando compe- 
ritur adfuisse impedimentum dirimens, super quo ex Apostolicae 
Sedis indulto dispensare ipse possit, magnumque fore incommodum 
requirendi a parte innoxia renovationem consensus, monita tamen 
parte conscia impediment! de effectu hujus sanationis." 

7. "Absolvendi contrahentes in omnibus et singulis casibus 
supra expositis, dummodo opus sit, ab incestus reatibus et 
censuris, imposita pro modo culparum congrua pcenitentia salutari, 
prolemque susceptam ac suscipiendam legitimam declarandi." 

8. " Subdelegandi praesentes facultates suis vicariis generalibus, 
quoties ultra diem a propria residentia abesse debeat, atque 
duobus vel tribus presbyteris sibi bene visis in locis remotioribus 
propriae dioecesis, pro aliquo tamen numero casunm urgentiorum, 
in quibus recursus ad ipsum haberi non possit." 

''Voluit autem Sanctituas Sua et omnino praecepit ut prsedictus 
episcopus superioribus facultatibus justis dumtaxat gravibusque 
accedentibus causis et gratis utatur, injuncta tamen aliqua 
congrua eleemosyna, in pium opus arbitrio ipsius episcopi 
eroganda, atque ut, elapso quinquennio, de singulis dispensationibus 
concessis certiorare debeat Apostolicam Sedem." 


" Dispensandi in utroque foro cum Catholicis ejus jurisdictioni 
subjectis, in manimoniis sive' contractis sive contrahendis, super 
sequentibus impeuimentis : " 

1. "Super impedimento primi gradus affinitatis in Hnea col- 
laterali ex copula licita provenientis pro" (v. c. decem) "casibus/' 

2. "Super impedimento secundi gradus consanguinitatis vel 
affinitatis admixli cum primo in linea transversali pro" (v. c. 
sexaginta) " casibus." 

3. " Super impedimento secundi gradus consanguinitatis vel 
affinitatis in linea transversali aequali pro" (v. c. centum) 

4. "Super impedimento publico primi gradus affinitatis, ex 
copula illicita provenientis, in linea sive collateral! sive etiam 
recta pro " (v. c. triginta) " casibus, dummodo si de linea 


recta agatur, nullum subsit dubium quod conjux sit pio'.es ab 
altero contrahentium genita." 

" Insuper Sanctitas Sua piaedicto Episcopo facultatem concessit 
in omnibus et singulis casibus superius expositis absolvendi con- 
trahentes, dummodo opus sit, ab incestus reatibus et censuris, 
imposita pro modo culparum congrua pcenitentia salutari ac 
prolem tam susceptam quam suscipiendam legitimam declarandi." 

" Voluit autem eadem Sanctitas Sua ac omnino praecepit, ut 
piaedictus Episcopus iisdem facultatibus urgentissimis dumtaxat 
concurrentibus. causis et gratis utatur, injuncta tamen aliqua 
eleemosyna in pium opus arbitrio ipsius episcopi eroganda." 

" Tandem SS. Pater eidem episcopo potestatam fecit prsedictas 
facultates subdelegandi suis vicariis generalibus, quoties ultra diem 
a propria residentia abesse debeat, atque duobus vel tribus 
presbyteris sibi bene visis in locis remotioiibus propriae dicecesis, 
pro aliquo tamen numero casuum urgentiorum, in quibus 
recursus ad ipsum haberi non possit." 


In the faculties granted our bishops by the Holy See we read 
under Extra ordinaries " C, " n. 9. (supra p. 117): " Benedicendi cor- 
onas precatoiias necnon erigendi confraternitates B. M. 

V. de Monte Carmelo, SS. Rosarii et Bonse Mortis, cum appli- 
catione omnium indulgentiarum et privilegiorum, quas Summi 
Pontifices iisdem confraternitatibus impertiti sunt: addita insuper 
potestate hanc facultatem communicandi presbyteris sacro ministerio 

If we argued correctly, V. p. 353, in regard to faculty n. 20, 
Form L, namely, that bishops cannot be reasonably supposed 
to withhold, for no reason whatever, from priests in the ministry 
those faculties which they are expressly empowered to delegate 
in general, we can presume, whether the circumstance be 
mentioned in our diocesan faculties or not, that every priest 
Exercising the usual faculties of a diocese has obtained from 
his ordinary the faculties contemplated in n. 9, "Form C." 

Among those faculties is that of erecting certain confraterni- 


ties, and imparting to the members the privileges granted at 
any time to the sodality or sodalities of that name. 

But here arises a difficulty. Any general law or general 
concession does not do away with local or personal privileges, 
unless in the law or concession special and express note is 
made of the circumstances that the legislator intends, by the 
law or concession, to abolish or curtail the local or personal 
privilege. Are these faculties in the nature of a general 
concession ? Or are they to be all regarded as a personal 
concession to the bishop > Or are they to be viewed as a 
local privilege granted the particular diocese ? We find it diffi- 
cult to admit either of the latter suppositions. Individual 
bishops do obtain personal privileges differing in the case of 
different persons. Privileges purely local have also been granted 
to particular dioceses. But the faculties, Forms I., C., D., E, 
are given as a matter of course to all our bishops. This makes 
it seem that, by a kind of general rule or law, it was resolved 
by the Holy See to grant such and such faculties to the 
bishops of the United States. These faculties are of course to 
be used in accordance with the requirements of the Sacred 
Canons and Apostolic Constitutions. Each faculty is to be ex- 
ercised within its natural limits. 

If we grant, what, indeed, it is not easy to deny, that these 
faculties seem to be neither local nor personal privileges, it 
follows that they take on the nature of general laws or con- 
cessions, and do not nullify per se any pre-existing privilege 
that was either local or personal. 

Piivileges granted exclusively to a religious Order, to a certain 
monastery, church, or community are regarded as personal or 
local or sometimes both. These are not annulled or curtailed 
by any general legislation or concession unless it be expressly 
mentioned that they are. 

Before examining the bearing of a recent decree on faculty 
n. 9, Form C., we must quote from the Sacred Congregation of 
Indulgences : 

An si inscio P. Generali Ordinis Prsedicatorum, per ordinarium 
erigatur confraternitas SS. Rosarii, confratres reipsa fruantur indul- 
gentiis in Brevi Apostolico per eosdem obtento expressis ? 

Resp, S. Ind. Congr: Negative. 
II. An fruantur aliis indulgentiis in dicto Brevi Apostolico 


non expressis, quas tamen aliis confratribus SS. Rosarii a 
diversis Summis Pontificibus concessas esse constat, ut in 
Dominicis mcnstruis, aut aliis diebus? 

R. Negative. 

De quibus omnibus facia per S. Congregation is secretarium 
die 26 Augusti 1747 SSrno D. N. Benedicto PP. XIV relatione, 
SanctiUis Sua ipsummet votum benigne approbando confirmavit. 
Deer eta authentica, n. 165. 

When giving his approbation to the foregoing decisions of 
the Cardinals, Pope Benedict, by special favor, ex Apostolicae 
potestatis plenitudine, declared canonical ex tune the confrater- 
nities illegally erected in the diocese of Costanza. " In post- 
erum tamen," we read in the decree 165, " voluit et expresse 
mandavit quod non aliter societates seu confraternitates SS. 
Rosarii erigantur, nisi requisitis prius et obtentis juxta formam a 
Sancto Pio. V. in Brevi diei 28 Junii 1569 incipienti Inter 
desideralilia piaescriptam, a Magistro laudati Ordinis Piaedicatorum 
pro tempore existente General i literis facultativis." 

The Brief Inter desiderabilia reserves exclusively to the F. 
General of the Dominicans and to ecclesiastics deputed by him 
the right to erect confraternities of the Holy Rosary, and spe- 
cifies some of the privileges and indulgences of the sodalists. 

The decree of the S. Congr. of Indulgences (165) approved 
by Benedict XIV. concludes as follows : " But the Master 
General (of the Dominicans) should forward the usual faculties 
for the erection of these confraternities to the priests of his 
Order, and. where no monastery of Dominicans exists, to other 
ecclesiastics, secular or regular, as well as to those designated 
by the ordinary : but these faculties can in no case be used 
without the consent of the bishop and without observing all 
the prescriptions of the Apostolic Constitutions for the erection 
of sodalities." 

Another Constitution of St. Pius V., dated 17 Sept., 1759, 
and beginning with the words : Consueverunt Romani Pontifices, 
is to the same effect as the Const. Inter desiderabilia. 

Hence two things may be inferred: (i) that only priests 
specially commissioned by the General of the Dominicans can 
erect confraternities or sodalities of the Holy Rosaiy ; and (2) 
that priests, secular or regular, on proper application, can obtain 
the necessary faculties for the erection of the confraternities in 


places where no Dominican monastery exists. Sodalities of the 
Holy Rosary not formed by priests regularly deputed are not 
canonical ; and their members neither participate in the privil- 
eges nor gain the indulgences granted the confraternity. Priests 
who desire to erect a sodality of the Holy Rosary, in addition 
to what is here said should study the rules laid down in 
THE PASTOR, Vol. V., p. 122. 

In regard to this faculty F. Konings, Theol. Mar., n. 1790, 
enquires : Quas confrattrnilates cum indulgenliis eisdcm a Sancta Sede 
annexis instiluere possint episcopi nostril 

He answers : The confraternities of Mount Carmel, of the 
Holy Rosary, and of a Happy Death. 

F. Konings' interpretation of that faculty n. 9. under Extraor- 
dinarice C. was generally accepted, and, as we believe, generally 
acted upon. 

It is a general principle, that favors, personal or special, are 
not withdrawn by any general legislation. Hence the constantly 
recurring phraseology, " speciali etiam mentione digna," when 
absolutely all privileges are withdrawn. In other documents the 
Society of Jesus is mentioned. This goes to prove only that 
the Society had obtained the privilege of not being included 
in prohibitory legislation unless individually mentioned. Haec 
lex pro omnibus non pro te facta est. 

Without any special delegation all bishops can erect sodalities: 


Cum in parochiali ecclesia, loci de Whereas in the parish church of 

Auamantla, Angelopolitnnse dinecesis, Anamantla, in the diocese of Pueblo 

magnam habeat venerationem qusedam de los Angeles, a certain miraculous 

miraculis clar.i imago Jesu Christi, image of our Lord and Redeemer 

Redemptoris nostri Domini del Disposo Jesus Christ, known as del Desposo, 

nuncupata, et in ejus capella, ejus- is an object of great veneration, and 

que in honorem et cultum centum in its honor and worship a sodality 

abhinc circiter annis auctoritate or- of both sexes was formed by author- 

dinarii instituta sit pia utriusque ity ot the bishop something like a 

sexus Christifidelium confraternitas ; hundred years ago ; and whereas the 

nunc vero presbyteri N. et N., cceteri- priests N. et N. as well as the 

que ejusdem confraternitatis conlrntres other members male and female of 

et consorores dubitantes de ipsius these sodalities begin now to doubt 

snibsistentia et canonica erectione, ad of their canonical erection, and con- 

effectum gaudendi indulgentiis, tarn sequently to their right to the indul- 

obtentis quam 'obtinendis, eo quia ab gences granted, or that may in future 

Apostolica Sede non fuerit confirmata, be granted, to these sodalities, owing 


supplicarunt humillime pro benigna to their not being confirmed by Ibe 
declaratione: Holy See, most respectfully submit 

for solution the two following Dubia: 

I. An clici possit canonica dictas i. Can a confraternity erected on 
confraternitatis erectio, solius ordi- the sole authority of the ordinary be 
narii auctoritate facta ? said to be canonically erected ? 

Resp. S. R. C.: Affirmative. R. Yes. 

II. An reportari debeat Apostolica 2. Does such a confraternity need 
confirmaiio ? to be approved by the Holy See. 

Resp. : Non indigere. Decreta R. A T o. 
Authentica, 195. 

One of the inherent rights of bishops, then, is that of forming 
confraternities ; and confraternities need nothing beyond the 
action of the bishops to be in law canonically erected. 

From this it follows that confraternities under any name can 
be lawfully and canonically erected by each bishop in his own 
diocese. It is understood, as a matter of course that for 
privileges or indulgences that exceed the limits of the ordinary's 
prerogatives, the Holy See is to be looked to. Each distinct 
foundaticn, even in the same diocese and of the same name, 
is to be guided by its own special Apostolic concession. As 
Lehmkuhl writes, (Rescripta Authemica, p. 702,): "Non existit 
generalis aliqua pro qualibet confraternitate indulgentiarum 
concessio ; sed post erectionem canonicam recurri debet ad <as 
obtinendas.'' The proof he quotes from Decreta Authenlica, 
numbers 74, no, and 113. We quote one, Deer. 74. 

Mcniales B. M. V. in Gallia titulo nostrae Dominae nuncupatae, 
licet claustralem regulam prosequantur, admittunt tamen convictrices 
puellas sub sodalitate Proesentationis B. M. V., vel instruendas 
vel confirmandas in fide Catholica. Hoc siquidem pio nitentes 
opere a Calviniana haeresi, quae irrepserat, mulierum faciliori 
deceptioni obnoxiarum discrimini occurrere, quern ad modum viris 
in fide alendis facilius accidit per alia media providere. Hujusmodi 
Institutum profitentes mcniales ejusdem Ordinis Tolosae obtinuerunt 
a S. M. Clemente XI. indulgentias confraternitatibus concedi 
solitas. Cum autem idem Institutum monialium late in Galliarum 
provinciis propagatum sit, supplicatur hodie nomine monasteriorum 
omnium similium pro concessione earumdem indulgentiarum 
sodalitatibus puellarum erectis sub eodem titulo Presentation**' 
in eisdem monasteriis. Resolvendum igitur superest ab EE. VV. : 
An similes indulgenticB concesscs sodalitali puellarum monasletii 
B. M. V. Tolosce, (oncedendoc sinl in cceteris omnibus- monasteriis 
ejusdem Instituti Galliarum? 

Resp. Supplicenl par titular iter sivgulce sodalitaies tanonia rrec/ce. 


The bishop then, per se vel per alium, canonically erects 
sodalities throughout his diocese. To do so he needs no au- 
thorization from the Holy See. But the Holy See may, of 
course, reserve to itself or restrict to certain places or to certain 
persons, the erection of a designated sodality. If it do, and then 
grant a right to a certain oftice, as to the bishop of N., or 
to a certain individual, to erect the designated sodality, we can- 
not well conceive on what grounds the right of the person so 
empowered to erect the sodality can be questioned. In para- 
graph 9, of the Facilitates E.\traordinarice C. we read what is 
equivalent to an express derogation of the privileges of the 
Religious Orders. The subjoined document recently issued is 
open to more than one construction. Our own opinion is that 
it does not touch the powers possessed by our bishops in vir- 
tue of that paragraph, n. 9. Others think otherwise. It is to 
be hoped steps will be at once taken to have the matter settled. 








Piae qucedam sodalitates sicuti a As certain pious sodalities owe their 

regularibus Ordinibus suam repetunt origin to religious Orders, the erec- 

existeniiam, ita eorumdem erectio tion here and there of these sodalities 

jure quodam proprio ejusdem Ordini- has been reserved very properly to 

bus competit. Inter has sunt recen- these Orders. Among sodalities of 

sendae sodalitates SSmae Trinitatis, B. this description, must be numbered 

Mariae Virginis a Monte Carmclo, those of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, 

nee uon a Septem Doloribus, quse of the Blessed Trinity, and of the 

a respectivis Ordinibus regularibus Seven Dolors. Consequently each of 

sunt institutse ac proinde ab ipsis these is to be erected only by members 

jure ordinario eriguntur. Verum of the Order with which the sodnlity 

experientia compertum est sodalitates originated. But it appears that these 

supradictas, insciis omnino supremis sodalities have been frequently erected 

moderatoribus eorum Ordinum ad without consulting the Orders to which 

quas memoratse sodalitates pertinent, they belong. This is done owing to 

auctoritate tantummodo episcoporum an erroneous interpretation of the 

saepenumero erectas reperiri, eo quod gene-al faculty granted bishops to 


plerumqne cum illis vigore Literarum erect sodalities of whatsoever name 

Apostolicarum facultas tribuatur and title. And then it is erroneously 

eri^endi in genere sodalitates cujus- presumed that sodalities thus erected 

cumque tituli et invocationis cum on the sole authority of the bishop 

respectivis Indulgentiis praelaudatas share in the indulgences that have 

quoque sodalitates ipsi erigunt sola been granted only to the Archconfra- 

vi generalis communicationis Indul- ternities in Rome, on the general 

gentiarum, quce sunt proprice Archi- principle of the communication of in- 

sodalitatum in Urbe existentium, dulgences. But for snch authority 

quin ulla fiat in Apostolicis Literis there should be an express derogation 

expressa derogatio privilegiorum prse- of the privileges ot the religious Orders 

fatis Ordinibus quod erectionem in the Apostolic' letters given to the 

suarum sodalitatum concessorum. bishop. 

Quum vero Sacra Congregatio The Sacred Congregation of Indul- 
Indulgentiis Sacrisque Reliquiis prse- gences, in order to put a stop to 
posita ad prrepediendos abusus et doubts and confusion, by a decree of 
confusiones removendas declarasset Aug. 19, 1747, which was approved 
per Decretum diei 19 Augusti 1747 and ratified by Pope Benedict XIV., 
approbatum et confirmatum sub die declared ihal sodalities of the Holy 
26 ejusdem mensis a s. m. Bene- Rosary erected without the concurrence 
dicto Papa XIV sodalitates a SSmo of the Father General of the Dom- 
Rosario erectas, inscio Magistro inicans are uncanonical, and therefore 
generaii Ordinis Prcedicatorum baud do not participate in the indulgences 
subsistere, ideoque carere omnino granted the parent sodality. Now 
Indulgentiis ejusdem sodalitatis pro- the priors general o f the Orders of 
priis, priores generales Ordinum the Blessed Trinity, of Mount Car- 
SSmae Trinitatis, Carmelitarum et mel, and of the Servants of Mary, 
Servorum Beatas Virginis quum ani- perceiving that in the matter of erecting 
madverterint quoad erectionem sua- their sodalities, a privilege exclusive- 
rum sodalitatum ex 'Apostolicse Sedis ly reserved to the respective Orders 
benignitate sibi commi.ssam eosdem ab- by Apostolic concession, confusion 
usus similesque confusiones irrepsisse, and abuses similar to those which 
quae locum jam habebant in ereciioni- prevailed in regard to the Rosary 
bus sodalitiorum SSmi Rosarii, humi- sodality have grown up, humbly pe- 
les porrexerunt preces SSmo Domino titioned the Holy Father to extend 
Nostro, quatenus superius memoratam the above dec'aration so as to include 
declarationem non semel editam pro sodalities of Mount Carmel, of the 
sodalitatibus SSmre Trinitatis, Beatae Blessed Trinity, and of the Seven 
Mariae Virginis a Monte Carmelo et Dolors, so that, if any of these sodal- 
a Septem Doloi ibus ; ita nempe, ut ities be erected by any person what- 
si contingat non obtenta prius ab soever not empowered to do so by 
eorumdem Ordinum supremis modera- the head of the Order, the erection 
toribus prsedictas sodalitates constitui, shall be invalid, and the sodalities so 
sub quovis proetextu cujuscumque erected shall not participate in the 
facultatis specialis, in qua ntilla fiat indulgences : and this invalidity to 
expressa derogatio privilegii hac super remain, no matter what the special 
re, dictis Ordinibus concessi, sodali- faculty granted the person who forms 
tatum erectio nullius sit roboris the sodality, unless, express mention 
adeoque Indulgentiis minime perfruatur. be made in the Apostolic letters that 


in this matter a derogation is made 
from the exclusive privilege to erect 
such confraternities possessed by the 
respective Orders. 

Quas preces SSmo Domino Nostro The petition was favorably received 

Leoni Papse XIII ab infrascripto by His Holiness Leo XIII., when 

Secretario in audientia habita sub laid before him by the undersigned 

die 16 Julii hujus devolventis mini secretary, on the i6th of July, 1887. 

relatis, idem SSmus peramanter ex- In regard to sodalities erected pre- 

cepit, ac praevia sanatione omnium vi<>us 10 this date without the concur- 

supradictarum sodalitatum insciis rence of the proper Order, His 

prioribus Generalibus memoratorum Holiness decreed them to be ex hoc 

Orclinum hue usque erectarum, quas valid and canonical. But for future 

validas esse declaravit, in posterum erections he wished and commanded, 

voluit ac mandavit, ut ad omne du- in order to remove all doubts and 

bium removendum nee non abusus abuses, that the sodalities or confrater- 

praecavendos, non aliter prsedictse nilies in question shall be erected by 

confraterniiates, sen sodalitates eri- no one unless he has previously ob- 

gantur, nisi requisitis antea et ob- tained written faculties to do so from 

tends a laudatorum Ordinum super- the superiors of the re>.pective religious 

ioribus pro tempore existentibus Orders. But the superiors shall com- 

literis facultativis pro earumdem municate the privilege in writing to 

erectione, ita tamen ut lidem priores priests of the Order, and also to 

generales pro hujusmodi confraterni- other clergymen, secular or regular 

latum sen sodalitatum erectionibus designated by the bishop for places 

consuetas literas sacerdotibus suorum where no house of the Order exists. 

Ordinum, vel ubi eorum d nventus The authority however gran'ed by 

non existunt, aliis ecclesiasticis viris such letters is not to be used without 

sive regularibus, sive saecularibus the consent of the ordinary of the 

etiam episcopis bene visis expediant, place, and without observing the 

ipssequse literoc i onnisi de consensu formalities and conditions prescribed 

ordinariorum, servatisque reliquis by Apostolic Constitutions or estab- 

omnibus in hujusmodi erectionibus. ]i s hed by usage. All things to the 

ex Apostolicis Constitutionibus ser- contrary notwithstanding, 
vandis ac servari solitis, executioni 
mandentur. Contrariis quibuscumque 
non obstantibus. 

Datum Romae ex Secretaria S. Given at Rome, from the Secretariate 

Cong. Indulg. die 16 Julii 1887. o f ti ie Sacred Congregation of Indul- 
gences. July, i6th, 1887. 

Fr. Thomas M. Card. Zigliara, p,. Thomas M. Card. Zigliara, 

Proff. Piefect. 

The Faculties of our bishops, it must be admitted, do not 
make express or special mention of the intention of the Holy- 
See to derogate in this matter from the exclusive privilege of 
any of those Orders. But in our opinion the special naming 
of the sodalities in n. 9 is equivalent to such mention. If it were 
a general faculty to erect confraternities, it would be different. 


But bishops need no such special faculty. It belongs to their 
ordinary powers. But it is not within the ordinary powers of a 
bishop to erect confraternities of the Holy Rosary, Mount Carmel, 
etc. Why? Because the Holy See expressly withdrew from all 
bishops so much of their ordinary powers. By the same authority 
that measure of authority is restored to our bishops by faculty 
n. 9, and the participation of the indulgences, which in no manner 
depends on the religious Orders, is decreed by the Holy See, 
and therefore valid. 

However, the question is not without its difficulties, and very 
plausible arguments might be advanced on either side. Konings, 
Commentarium in Facilitates Apost. n. 144, favors the opinion that 
the Faculties granted in n. 9 "C" empower the bishop to erect 
these confraternities. Not certain, however, he says: "Quaestio 
Romam delata fuit." If any reply has been given, it thus far 
escaped our notice. 


Lelltr from the Editor of the "Sun " 

New York, April I, 1887. 

DEAR SIR : Please accept my best thanks fur the interesting specimen 
of a palm leaf which you have sent me. 1 he artistic braiding of it is 
very fine, and by means of it the leaf will be preserved much longer 
than it would endure otherwise. Yours truly, 

C. A. DAXA. 

And again : 

Since the introduction of the palmetto leaf, the spruce and hemlock 
twigs have rapidly fallen into disuse. The leaf can be twisted and woven 
into various beautiful and artistic designs, and retains its shape for years. 
The Daily Graphic, (M V.) April 2, 1887. 

This is pitiful ! How can a Catholic of sound mind and 
body presume to offer us the rubrics of the Graphic and the 
Stm, in lieu of those of the Missal? " Quousque tandem 
abutere, Ganedsami, patientia nostra ? " 

"Of/o magi's sen/ire compunctionem quarn scire ejus definition em. " a Kempis. 


MARCH, 1888. 

No. 5. 


No doubt several of our readers are well acquainted with the 
APOSTOLIC UNION'. Others are not so fortunate. For the sake 
of the cause, we must beg the former to bear with us, while, 
in as brief a space as possible, we endeavor to bring the UNION 
to the notice of their confreres. 

Members of the UNION who are familiar with every clause of 
the Rule, and who know by experience how it works in 
practice, and what its efficacy in shaping the life and determining 
the actions of the individual, these will likely be disappointed 
by the following pages, and complain of the meagreness with 
which the matter is treated. Most important items are entirely 
omitted ; others barely glanced at ; and matters that to them 
seem of small moment dwelt upon at length. Of all these 
things the writer is fully conscious. In view of his object they 
are not defects. Our end will be wholly gained, if we say 
just enough to excite the curiosity of readers, and provoke 
further enquiry. We are careful to indicate the quarters in 
which it will be proper to make such enquiry, and where all 
information regarding this most exalted of confraternities will be 
cheerfully furnished. Our part takes us no further. 

The suggestions of the prelates at the Vatican Council as to 
the advisability of discussing or deciding any question, were taken 
in writing and teimed Postulata. Among such Postulata was 
the following, signed by a number of bishops : 

Cum nihil sit in ecclesiastica disciplina, et ppiritui Ecclesise, 
et antiquis canonibus, et exemplis sanctorum patrum, magis 
consonum quim vita communis clericorum, ex qua maximae certe 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 


multiplicesque profluere noscuntur utilitates, turn pro morum 
integritate tutius servanda, turn pro pietate et scientia uberius 
excolendis, turn pro sacro rrinisterio magis concorditer et iruc- 
tuose exercendo, adhortetur Concilium episcopos ut, quantum in 
Domino dabitur, huic sanctae communi clericorum vitae favere 
omnimodo satagant. 

Quapropter : i Statuant, ut in multis dioecesibus jamdiu fit, 
quoslibet paroeciarum vicarios cum parochis suis sub eodem 
tecto commorari debere, et eidem mensae assidere : 2 Sacerdotum 
saecularium communitatibu, vel piis quibuslibet sodalitatibus, sub 
diversis formis ac nomimbus institutis vel instituendis, omnem 
favorem et gratiam praestent : 3 Nihil demum negligant et 
intentatum relinquant, ut clerus saecularis a separate illo et 
solitario vivendi modo, qui nimis amorem proprium sapit, ad 
cohabitationem, convictum, consociationem, quae caritatem redolent 
et unioni favent, transfcratur. Martin, Omnium Cone. Vaticani 
Documentorum Collettio, p. 149. 

Owing to its untimely disruption, the Vatican Council never 
reached action on this subject. What the bishops would have 
done, must, therefore, remain a mere matter of conjecture. 
There can be little doubt, however, that the great majority of 
'the prelates would favor the adoption, where feasible, of the first 
'recommendation, namely, that priests attached to the same church 
should all live in the same house, and take meals at a common 
table. Such has always been the rule in the United States, but 
;the contrary is the rule throughout Europe. Each assistant 
keeps house for himself, or where there are several, two or three 
-club together for the house-keeping. It is unnecessary to say 
that the Pos ulatum never contemplated two or more parish priests, 
even in the same small town, having a common residence. 

But long before the Vatican Council, the dangers to a priest 
'living in isolation were perceived and deplored. The difficulty 
was to devise the remedy. While the different parish priests 
must live near their churches and in the midst of their charge, 
'the isolation is a thing inevitable. But if it cannot be wholly 
avoided, nor its dangers entirely eliminated, may they not be 
lessened, reduced to a minimum ? And if so, how ? The 
dangers were insinuated with sufficient clearness in the Postulatum : 
"Seeing that there is in ecclesiastical discipline nothing more in 
conformity with the spirit of the Church, the ancient, canons, 
and the example of our sainted fathers, than to have the clergy 


live in common, from which, beyond doubt, very great and 
very many benefits are derived, for the better safeguarding of 
morals, the quicker advance in piety and learning, and the more 
harmonious and fruitful exercise of the sacred ministry, (we beg) 
the Council to exhort the bishops to do all in their power to 

promote this holy community-life among the clergy 

and to leave nothing undone by which the secular clergy may 
be withdrawn from a solitary and isolated mode of living. " 

Some sort of union, such as that now known as the "Apos- 
tolic," existed among the secular clergy (or mutual aid, counsel, 
and comfort from the very beginning of Christianity. It took 
one form here, another, there. The priests of a diocese 
generally formed such a body. But as the number of the 
faithful multiplied and the number of priests increased, the bonds 
of mutual dependence, one upon another, became relaxed. The 
idea, however, was never lost sight of. In that idea the 
Religious Orders all had their root. The " Va? soli" (Kccles.> 
iv., 10,) peopled the monasteries. 

From the time of the Reformation the need of drawing the 
secular clergy into closer spiritual union with each other was be- 
coming every day more apparent. Numbers of them have been ever 
since compelled to live among an unsympathetic, if not hostile, 
population. To bring about this desirable end, God raised up 
the venerable Bartholemew Holzhauser. Holzhauser was born at 
Langnau, a small village of Suabia, in 1613, and died pastor 
of Bingen in 1658. He was ordained priest in 1639. 

When Holzhauser, after months of meditation on the subject, 
distinctly conceived his project, and made up his mind as to the 
means by which it could best be effected, he laid the matter 
before his bishop. The latter not only approved the contemplated 
Union, but eagerly seconded the plans proposed to bring it 
about. Holzhauser was not slow to perceive that in the seminary, 
nay, in the college, the work should begin. He accordingly 
opened a seminary at Tittmoningen, and a preparatory college 
in Salzburg. 

Holzhauser's work was crowned with success. Before the end 
of the century the Pious Unions were found in every country 
of Europe, if not in every diocese. The work was approved 
by the Holy See, and commended everywhere by the dignitaries 
of the Church. The few rules he laid down for the guidance 
of the Unions in his Constitution's cum exercitiis dericorum scecu- 


larium in communi viventium, were formally approved twenty-two 
years after his death, (1680), by Innocent XL They contain, 
as the Papal nuncio at Cologne remarked, the very marrow of 
the sacred canons. 

Owing to many circumstances, but chiefly to the wars that 
convulsed central Europe during the eighteenth century, the 
pious unions were broken up one by one, and when better 
times came, not always revived. Within these recent years, under 
the impulse given the work by his late Holiness Pius IX., a sys- 
tematic effort is being made to re-establish those unions through- 
out the entire Church. If re-established, the re-establishment 
must be the work of the clergy themselves. All the bishops can 
do in the matter is to countenance or give their approval to 
the good work. It is of the very essence of the pious union 
that, as a union, it shall not be under episcopal control, as it is 
of its essence that the adhesion thereto of each member shall 
be entirely voluntary. 

To this re-awakening of the spirit in favor of the pious 
unions, a French priest, J. P. L. Gaduel, has perhaps contributed 
more than any other man by the publication, in ib6i, of his 
work Vie du venerable Strviteur de Dim Barihelemy Holzhauser, 
fondateur de FInstitut dis clercs seculitrs vivant en com munaute; 
avcc une Etude sur cet Inslitut. This publication was after 
Pius the Ninth's own heart. He watched with anxiety its 
effect upon the clergy, and was delighted to be informed that the 
good seed sown by Canon Gaduel was early producing good 
fruit. To encourage the work he addressed the following beau- 
tiful Brief to the learned and pious canon : 

Dilecto Filio canonico P. GADUEL, vicario gcnerali Aurelianensi, 


Dilecte Fili, salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem. 

Gratulamur tibi, Dilecte Fili, quod semen a te jactum per 
commentarium de vita et gestis venerabilis Bartholomcei Holz- 
hauser in bonam terram incident, multosque jam videas clericos 
saeculares, juxta illius Institum in communem coivisse vitae 
societatem. Utilitas certe ilia quoe saeculo xvn inde . obvenit 
clero, praesertim germanico, non minores aetati nostraj spondere 
videtur fructus : siquidem consociatio animorum, fota per com- 
munem vitam, alit caritatem, simulque Dei favorem conciliat, 
qui se futurum promisit in medio eorum qui in nomine ipsius 


congregati fuerint, et locuturum ad cor in solitudine. Bonum 
propterea et jucundum dixit Regius Psaltes habitare fratres in 
unum, reique suavitatem et efficaciam comparavit unguento in 
capite Aa-ron, quod descendit in barbam ejus et in oram vestimenti ; 
ac rori, quo perfunduntur monies Hermon et Sion. Clerici enim 
a societate saeculari negotiisque semoti, et in unitate fidei ac 
spiritus conjuncti, inunguntur spirituali gratia, quae intellectum 
veluti caput irrigat, omnemque vitse rationem componens et ad 
sedulam ciens creditorum munerum functionem, descendit per 
evangelicum ministerium ad fideles, eorumque corda veluti ros 
matutinum fecundat. Qua de re non probatum dumtaxat, sed 
et piaeceptum conspicimus ab antiquis Ecclesiae legibus, ut 
presbyteri, diaconi, subdiaconi simul manducent et dormiant, d 
quidquid eis ab ecclesiis compeiit communittr habeant; ac suasutn 
ut ad apostolicam, commumm scilicet, vitam, summopere pervtnire 
studeant. Factum idcirco est, ut -cum primum servus Dei a 
Decessore nostro sa. m. Innocentio X Instituti sui approbatio- 
nem poposcit, Nostra Congregatio Episcoporum et Regularium 
negotiis praeposita, cui res comrr.issa fuerat, respondent : Rtm 
Instituti hujus pianz et sanctam ac juxta antiquos Ecclesice canones 
esse, quce confirmatione non indigeat <.iim profiteatur hoc ipsum, quod 
prime? christianitatis ckrus fecit. Eant igitur in pace, et cum omni 
benedictione deducant in praxim. Novum tamen decus tarn utili 
veteris discipline instaurationi additurus, sa : me: Innocentius 
XI, defuncto jam Bartholomseo, Institutum Apostolica auctoritate 
confirmavit anno 1680, et ea de re scribens ad Leopoldum I, 
Imperatorem, qui id fieri postulaverit, dixit : 

L' institute dei chierici in commune viventi, che dalla Maesta Vostra 
ci fu anni sono raccommandato, e stato da noi* prcesentemente con 
autorita Apostolica confcrmaio ; e ci promette nella cullura dtlla 
vigna del Signore frutti tanto copiosi, che merita di essere in grande 
stima appresso de tuti ed essere da tutti protetto. Et paulo post in 
alia epistola : Tante grande e il concetto che abbiamo de esso, che 
ne speriamo indubitamente un copioso progresso alia Chiesa di Dio, ed 
a not una raccolta sempre durabile di allegrezza. 

Spem hanc et Nos fovemus, si eodem Bartholomasi spiritu 
novae istae clericorum in commune viventium societates informentur. 
Quam ob rem et eos commendamus, qui in hujusmodi vitae 
Institutum jam coierunt ; et nova semper atque ampla omina- 
mur laetis istis exordiis incrementa. Tibi vero, qui per librum 
tuum tarn bene meruisti de clero, et iis omnibus qui praestan- 


tioris boni desiderio ducti nomen suum dederunt, ac daturi sunt 
piis hisce societatibus, ccelestium gratiarum auspicem et pisecipuae 
benevolentias Nostros pignus, Aposto'licam Benedictionem pera- 
manter impertimus. 

Datum Romas apud S. Petrum die 17 martii 1866, Ponti- 
ficatus Nosiri anno XX. 


With a Brief equally laudatory he honored the priest who 
revived the pious unions in Belgium : 

Dilecto Filio L. N. B., parocho, rcclori consociaticnis cleri 
scecularis Namurcensis, 


Dilecte Fili, salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem. 

Gratulamur tibi, Dilecte Fili, quod arduum cleri saecularis 
consociationis opus a te instauratum in ista Namurcensi dicecesi, 
fcecundatum videas divina benedictione. Haec sane Institutio, 
quas beneficia et efficaciam Regularium Ordinum transfert in 
saecularem clerum, dum palatos sacrorum ministros diversisque 
curis di^tractos in unum veluti corpus cogit, peculiari subjicit moder- 
amini, communibus devincit regulis, communibus fovet pietatis 
exercitiis, eodemque spiritu informal, exornavit prisca Ecclesise 
saecula ; et licet longa rerum vicissitudine sublata, refloruit iterum 
in Germania, declinante saeculo decimo septimo, per servum Dei 
Bartholomaeum Holzhauser, cui non modo plauserunt episcopi 
summique principes, sad hsec ipsa Sancta Sedes validissime 
suffragata fuit. Verum cum in universali rerum subversione rur- 
sum ipsa periisset, frustra desiderata fuerat hactenus. Laeti igitur, 
nunc eamdem reviviscere conspicimus apud Belgas ; et eo jucun- 
dius quo gravius animorum viriumque cleri conjunctionem 
postulant in praesentiarum, sive varia dissimilisque ejusdem cleri 
educatio, inducta a praeteritorum eventuum infelicitate, sive tem- 
pora summopere adversa Ecclesia;, sive vulgati et infestissimi 
Christiano populo errores. Maximas autem Deo gratias agimus 
quod perdifficili ccepto tuo sic faverit, ut non paucos e specta- 
bilioribus Namurcensis cleri presbyteris ei nomen dedisse conspicias ; 
nee difiidimus quin egregium istud exemp'um non modo 
complures e piis eorum sodalibus alliciat, sed per ipsam pro- 
priae et proximorum utilitatis illecebram, alias quoque pervadat 
diceceses. Nos certe pro studio tuo nobilissimam hanc ominamur 


mercedem ; ac interim, superni favoris auspicem et paternae 
Nostrae benevolentiae pignus, Apostolicam Benedictionem tibi, 
dilecte Fiii, iisque omnibus qui huic consociationi sub eccle- 
siasticae auctoritaiis moderamine se addixerint eamve promovebunt, 
peramanter impertimus. 

Datum Romas apud S. Petrum, 17 Maii 1875, Pontificatus 
Nostri anno vigesimo nono. 


It would be superflous to name the archbishops and bishops 
who favor and approve of the establishment of the Apostolic 
Union. All do. The words of the S. Congregation of Bishops 
and Regulars .quoted in the Brief to Canon Gaduel settle every 
doubt. "The Institute needs no (one's) approbation/' 

What is the Institute ? It is an association of priests of the 
same diocese, under the patronage of the Sacred Heart, whose 
members follow a rule cf life under the direction of a superior 
chosen from among themselves. Its object is thus set forth by 
Gaduel : " The essential in Holzhauser's idea is to beget a 
closer and holier union among priests ; to offer to secular priests 
remaining such, and continuing to live in the world in the 
discharge of th ir holy ministry, a great part of the aids and 
means to perfection which the "common life " affords to the 
regular clergy ; to prevent priests who wish to remain seculars, 
and to serve the Church and souls in the parochial ministry, 
from being forced to live isolated and alone, with all the 
inconveniences of such a situation : which are weakness, want 
of protection, the danger of laxity and even at times great 
perils to their virtue ; to procure for pious priests who, either 
by inclination or the attractions of grace, feel the necessity and 
the desire of the ''common life/' the means of finding this life 
around them, in their diocese, even amidst the employments of 
the holy ministry to which their vocation calls them ; finally, 
to give them in their presbyteries and in the midst of their 
parishes all the principal advantages of a community, a holy 
rule, superiors who may be to them spiritual fathers, brethren 
with whom they may live more cordially in unity of mind and 
sentiment, a family with its consolations, its strong supports to 
virtue, which are the inestimable privileges of the common life." 

"The essence of the common life," writes the venerable 
Holzhauser, "does not necessarily consist in the reunion of a 
great number under the same roof; that might produce only an 


agglomeration, but not a true community. The essence and the 
basis of the common life, what constitutes and sustains it, is to 
have a common mle and to observe it; to have one mind, a 
common end, and common interests ; in a word, to form one 
family, in which you may meet brothers, a father, hearts that 
love you, and in which you may be always sure to find support 
and aid. Then, were you obliged during many years to live 
alone, you are not therefore a private individual, a man isolated 
and without prop or support ; you are a member of a body 
corporate, you form one of a community. 

Was not St. Francis Xavier, even when alone in mid-ocean, 
in the solitudes of India, a member of a religious community? 
A "common life/' then, can evidently exist even amongst priests 
employed in the -holy ministry, though the greater number be 
obliged to live more or less alone, dispersed in their several 

Jt is certain that St. Augustine and his pious crmpanions 
dwelt together in unity without any formal written code of rules. 
It is equally certain that they lived up to certain well under- 
stood regulations of the house or monastery. Such, too, was 
the manner of life in the nunnery he established after he became 
bishop ; and such it remained during the life-time of his sister, 
its first abbess. At her death the nuns split into two factions on 
the election of a successor. Hearing of the trouble, the bishop 
addressed them a letter strongly exhorting them to union. Peace 
was restored. He then addressed them a second letter (Ep. 211) 
in which he laid down a few general rules for their guidance. 
This is the Rule of St. Augustine. It was adopted by the men 
in the houses which he founded. That rule was not, nor was it 
intended to be, complete as to details and minor points. It 
was but the framework, the fundamental regulations. The super- 
structure could assume many different forms. Yet the whole 
would be properly termed the Rule of St. Augustine. And so we 
have the Hermits of St. Augustine, the Augustinian Canons Reg- 
ular, etc., all venerating the great Bishop of Hippo as their 
founder and lawgiver. 

As with the rule of St. Augustine, so with the Apostolic Union. 
With a few fundamental points in common, the variety may be 
infinite. In no two dioceses need the regulations be similar 
in detail ; yet all would belong to the Institute established by 
the venerable Holzhauser. The name Apostolic Union embraces 


all, but the Union in each diocese may have its own particular 
name. The Apostolic Union as embracing all, is under the 
patronage of the Sacred Heart. This does not prevent each 
diocesan union from having its own special patron or patrons. 

On page 72 of this volume may be seen the rules adopted 
by one dioccsin Union. Now the same reason which impel- 
individuals to associate and form the original diocesan Union, 
again impels the dioceScin Union to seek fraternity with, anu 
support from, surrounding Unions. In this way the experience; 
of each become common property. The causes of failure in on^ 
place, and success in another, can be clearly scanned ; and the 
difficulties or troubles to which a Union succumbed, can be at 
once recognized as fatal and shunned accordingly. The name 
adopted for this association of diocesan Unions is The 
Apostolic Union. This embraces all the diocesan Unions 
that are willing to adopt its rule. Ordinarily, then, a priest can 
be a member of the APOSTOLIC UNION only through his membership 
in a diocesan Union. 

- The APOSTOLIC UNION has adopted a General Rule. A condi- 
tion for the admission of a diocesan Union into the APOSTOLIC, 
is the acceptance of this Rule. However, so general are its 
terms, that it does not interfere with the distinct bent, tendency, 
or regulations of any diocesan Union. One important point, 
however, may be noted: "As, generally, the associates have not 
the advantage of living under the eye of a superior, they should 
note every evening, in some species of diary prepared ad hoc, 
their exterior violations, if any, of the rules ; and on one of 
the early days of each month send the diary to the superior, 
who will thus be in a position, when returning the diary, to 
give any needful admonition or advice. This practice, annoying 
to nature, is of undoubted efficacy. It is a daily control which 
supplies in part the advantages of a real community. Hence 
all the associates are much attached to it, and regard it . a- 

Perhaps the best, if not the only means of making the ratio 
mentis, or use of the diary, intelligible to those who were never 
members of a Union is to submit a form for inspection. It 
must be remembered, however, that each Union can determine for 
itself the nature and the number of its queries ; and not only 
each Union but each individual member according to the peculiar 
duties devolving on him. 


Ratio Mcnsis. 


"NTn . . 








Surcrere hora statuta. 


Meclitatio ($ horse). 


Prajparatio ad Missam. 


Gratiarum actio (\ horse). 


Slndium ecclesiasticum (4 horse). 


Examen particulare. 


Lectio spiritualis (\ horjs). 


Rosarium B. V. M. 


Visitatio SS. Sacramenti. 


Antici patio Mat. et Laud. 


Notare Missas acceptas et celebratas. 


Praeparatio medit. pridie. 


Preces Vesp. cum Exam, generali. 


Oratio " Domine Jesu ". 


Quotidiana notatio schedulae. 


Confessio sacramentalis. 


RecoUectio Menstrua. 


Missa menstrua SS. Cordis Jesu. 


In tent io sccundaria et inem. sp. pro Unione. 


Mense ISov. Missa pro def. Sodal. 


Lectio Script. Sacra). 



It would appear from the regulation II. 8, page 73, supra, that 
the Unio Sacerdotum Scecularium does not belong to the APOSTOLIC 
UNION. In the Unio Sacerdotum the diaries are handed in only 
every six months, and then, instead of being returned quamprimum 
to the sender, they are destroyed. We certainly prefer the 
General Rule, to leave the destruction of such diaries to the 

A priest who knows of no association in liis diocese, and 


















l 1 


i I. j 

















JV. B. Signum rile pcractum ) 

Signum o I'olnntarie omissum 
Signum x involuntarie omissum ) 

exercitium denolal. 

who desires to secure the precious advantages of this sacerdotal 
work, has only to write to the President-General, M. Lebeurier, 
Rue de Vaugirard 71, Paris, France, who will send him every 
information, and who will be, at least provisionally, his immediate 
superior. Such a priest, even under these conditions, will enjoy 
the advantages of an approved rule and be a partaker 


in the precious community of spiritual benefits of the APOSTOLIC 

The Apostolic Union numbers at present over 3,500 members, 
several of whom are in the United States. To facilitate admission 
to the UNION for priests in this country, whether as individuals 
or as diocesan Unions, the President-General has seen fit to 
constitute a Vices-Gerens in the person of Rev. M. T. Schiffmacher, 
pastor of Neola, (Iowa) in the diocese of Davenport. 

From the monthly publication Etudes Ecclesiastiques we summarize 
the benefits to be hoped from the diary. 

1. // insures regularity. General resolutions are of little worth. 
Even particular ones need to be renewed. A glance at the 
diary pointing out, as it does, day by day, the lapses, concentrates 
the mind on the weak points, and for very shame compels to 
stronger endeavor. 

2. // keeps us humble. Oar shortcomings stare us. Peccatum 
meum contra me est semper. And then we submit an account 
of our negligences to the eye of another. This docile submission 
as little children is an approach to the pure spirit of the 
Gospel, efficiamini sicut parvuli. This spirit is directly opposed 
to the spirit of the world a spirit of pride and of exaggerated 
personal independence. 

3. // makes us practise mortification. It makes us rise, for 
instance, at a certain hour, when we would fain lie abed a little 
longer. And so on, during the day. It makes us do this and 
that at certain times, that for the moment we had rather post- 
pone. The greatest mortification is to renounce our own will, 
and to be constantly doing that which we would not. 

4. // makes us appreciate the vilue of time. With its own time 
allotted to every action, every thing is done. Our days are full. 
But each duty must be got out of hand to prepare for the next. 
Thus, as Vespers and Matins and Lauds are to be said in the 
afternoon, too much time wont be wasted after dinner with 
visitors, or in visiting, in amusements, or recreation. Our 
days are orderly. There is plenty of time for every duty, but 
none to throw away. Without the aid of the diary it is not 
easy to be avaricious of time, or to appreciate it at its proper 
value. Few do, if any. 

5. // facilitates our examination of conscience. Because it begets 
a habit of introspection and makes us watchful not only of our 
external actions, but of the inward motions of our soul. The 


review at the annual retreat will be very easy. The diary is a 
monthly searching review, and after making that for the twelve 
months it will be an easy matter to look backward, and see at 
a glance the sins and imperfections of the year. 

6. It habituates us to the use of spiritual direction. This was 
always dear to the saints. Efficiamini sicut parvuli. Distrusting 
themselves, they preferred to be guided by others. Besides the 
mere advice, this spiritual direction was always the source of 
many benefits to God's servants by giving them opportunities of 
practising many a virtue and laying up treasures in heaven. 

7. // keeps the senrimrv spirit alive. And as a venerabe superior 
once said : " A priest who remains a seminarian all his life is 
a saint. '' If we consider the matter a moment, it will be 
evident that nothing can be better than the diary for preserving 
or even regaining the seminary spirit. What is that spirit? 
Primarily one of dependence. It is one of watchfulness over 
our interior and exterior actions. It is one wherein we are 
conscious of being always under the eyes of others, and 
whose watchfulness over us we court and repose in placidly. 
The whole seminary life fosters humility, simplicity, silence, 
recollection, forbearance with others, carefulness, and ready 
punctuality, even in trifles. The diary keeps us seminarians in 
virtue, or brings our ways as well as our thoughts in after years 
back to the ways and thoughts of the earlier days of our priest- 

8. // enables us to acquire many virtues. The greatest obstacle to a 
priest's perfection is an irregular way of life a drift, haphazard, 
from one action to another. Life passes, and nothing is done. 
Chance, not intention, directs. Intention will is the basis of 
merit. Men labor all the day and in the -evening their hands 
are empty. The diary establishes us at once in order and 
regularity. With it every action is intended, every one great and 
small is meritorious ; then, it makes us study ourselves inwardly 
and outwardly. We can contrast one month with another, and 
perceive wherein we are loosening ihe reins and wherein 
with God's grace we are amending. This is no small matter. 
We learn to know ourselves and to realize wherein we are weak. 
It is the necessary preliminary to correction and amendment. 

9. // keeps us in obedience. If there is one virtue which the 
diary enforces more than another, that virtue is obedience. "Vir 
obediens loquetur victorias." Without the diary, the secular 


priest, left mostly to himself to do as he likes, has but small 
opportunity of practising obedience or, consequently, of sharing 
in the glory and the triumphs guaranteed by the word of God 
to those who practise this virtue. But as soon as a priest, in 
a Union, under a chosen superior, adopts the diary and is 
faithful thereto, nearly every act, great and small, of his becomes 
an act of obedience. He grows used, not mechanically but 
consciously, to the practice of the virtue. Obedience is the 
wisdom of the saints, and in its train follow all virtues omnia 
nobis dedit pariter cum ilia. 

10. The diary is a stay against relapses. This is so self-evident, 
it needs no word. The diary being an ever present monitor, 
it is ever whispering in the ear " Beware." It necessarily makes 
the conscience more delicate and sensitive and louder in its 
warnings in the presence of danger. Relapses are less frequent ; 
faults diminish in number. 

11. The diary throws a strong light on the spiritual condition of ihe 
priest. The greatest danger to a priest is to be moving on from 
day to day thoughtless of his spiritual condition. Not only the 
man's sacerdotal "virtue is endangered, but his very salvation. 
And yet it is not difficult to conceive how a man " busy about 
many things " could fall into this state, and let the years glide 
by, not quite satisfied with himself, but still putting off a 
thorough arranging of his interior from week to week, until he 
shall have more leisure. In reality, leisure sufficient was never 
wanting. But he has entered upon a downward path, an easy 
path ; and, after some fruitless, spasmodic resolutions, he resigns 
himself to his course. Perfunctorily he administers the sacraments, 
real zeal no longer moves him, his sermons are without soul 
words, the tremendous Sacrifice is offered without awe a mere 
every-day function. The diary would have prevented this ruin. 
It would have admonished him at the very first downward step, 
and continuously admonished him at every subsequent step, 
downwards. If there be a hope of such a one, once down, 
returning to the spirit of the priesthood, to the fervor of his 
early days, that hope will be firmly founded if the diary be 
begun in earnest. Facilis descensus, but the return is painfu 
and difficult. He needs all the assistance he can procure. But 
nowhere will he find more potent aid than in the diary of the 
Apostolic Union. 

12. The diary is a guarantee of perseverance. This is self-evident. 


13. The diary is the best preparation for death. It is a constant, 
careful preparation. It causes the priest io live a pious priestly 
life, which closes in a pious priestly death. Qualis vita, mors est 
ita. Like a true and tried friend, the diary, stays by us through 
life. To have kept it, will be the priest's greatest consolation on 
that bed of darkness and suffering whence he is to pass into 
the presence of the Just Judge. What priest will not rejoice 
that he kept the diary? How many will regret that in the 
days of their strength they did not keep one, and hearken to the 
Apostle's advice "Attende tibi et doctrinae," Tibi, first. 

This paper will very properly conclude with the following 
document : 

BRIEF addressed by His Holiness Leo XIII. to the President- 
General of the Apostolic Union, the Very Rev. Victor Lebeuiier, 
canon of the Cathedral of Orleans, France : 

Beloved Son : Health and Apostolic Benediction ! 

Not without great joy have we learned, Beloved Son, both 
from your lips and from your letters, that the work of bringing 
the secular clergy back to the " common life/' as f<ir as 
compatible with their duties, has thus far, though difficult, 
progressed so favorably, that it has already been taken up in 
thirty of the dioceses of France and in all of the dioceses of 
Belgium, with the approval of the bishops. Divine Providence 
seems to have reserved for this age, so hostile to the Church 
and so replete with danger to souls, the restoration of that sal- 
utary Institution. It was indeed prescribed by the early canons, 
but was lost sight of in the lapse and vicissitudes of succeeding 
centuries. And, although,, later, it was again introduced and 
propagated by the Venerable Bartholemew Holzhauser, it was 
again uprooted by the political upheavals of the past century 


Dilecte Fili, Salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem. 

Non sine magna animi Nostri jucunditate, Dilecte Fili, didicimus e 
colloquio litterisque tuis, opus revocationis cleri ssecularis ad vitam, qua 
fieri possit, communem, quantumvis arduum, adeo prospere processisse, ut 
jam triginta pervaserit Galliarum diceceses et Belgicas omnes, probantibus 
episcopis. Ad hrec tempora, adeo Ecclesise infensa et animabus periculosa, 
servasse videtur divina Providentia instaurationem salutaris istius Instituti, 
quod antiquis prseceptum canonibus sjeculorurn lapsus et vicissitudines 
oblitteraverant ; quodque, licet invectum iterum et propagatum serius a 


and of our own. And, indeed, whether we consider the dis- 
jointed unharmonious state to which the secular clergy were 
driven by these disturbances, and the resulting differences of 
opinion among them on almost every subject ; or whether we 
consider the wiles by which those who hate the Church and 
are resolved to break up Catholic unity seek to ensare the 
clergy, to foment discord among them, and to withdraw them 
from their allegiance to their bishops and the Apostolic See ; 
it certainly seems that the movement now set on foot of call- 
ing this old Institution back into life again, whereby the secular 
clergy will be drawn into closer union, had its impulse from 
on high, in order to protect the unity that is assailed. A uni- 
form method of life is proposed for all ; spiritual exercises 
which foster piety and strengthen virtue against the dangers of 
the day ; an account of the daily life rendered at stated times 
by each to a superior, and his suggestions or admonitions re- 
ceived ; the monthly conference on matters pertaining to the 
ministry and spiritual work, that produces unaminity of opinion 
and sentiment ; the one common goal towards which all 
with united forces strive under the guidance of their bishop ; 
the will to aid one another, begotten of closer acquaintance 
and friendship ; all these things will unite not only those who 
live under the same roof, but will also unite by a spiritual 
bond all the members, even those whose duties keep 

Venerabili Bartholomaeo Holzhauser, rursum extinxerant prasteritae nostraeque 
netatis commotiones. Et sane : sive spectare placeat minus soliclam et 
c incordem institutionis indolem, cui perturbationes istce sejunctos levitas 
obnoxios fecerunt, tliversamque inde partam sentiendi, judicandi, docendi 
rationem ; sive considerentur artes, quibus osores Ecclesiae, unitati Catliolicre 
disgregandae intenti, adlaborant clero vitiando, dissociando, avertendo a 
propriis pastoribus et ab hac Apostolica Sede ; superno prorsus consilio 
factum videbitur, ut impetitae unitati tuendce confirmandasque vetus Institutum 
necessitati accommodatissimum ad novam nunc vitam revocaretur. Uniformis 
enim vivendi ratio universis proposita ; exercitia quae foveant pietatem 
muniantque virtutem ad versus srcculi pericula; gestorum propriorum rationes 
ultro redditae praepositis, eorumque animadversionibus periodice subjectae ; 
menstrui conventus ad spiritualia colloquia de rebus ad ministerium spec- 
tantibus, quae mentes non satis conconles ad eamdem sententiam adducant ; 
praestitutus finis, ad quern sub episcopi moderamine vires omnes jungantur ; 
studium ex ipsa consuetudine et amicitia erumpens invicem sibi subveniendi : 
haec omnia non modo unum facient ex iis omnibus qui communi gaudebunt 
contubernio; sed ceteros etiam sodales inde advocates a proniii officii curis 
ita spirituali nexu divincient, ut nemo se sentiat a familia divulsum, 
moderatore privatum, sibi relictum, opportune fratrum auxilio consihoqiie 


them at a distance from their associates ; so that no one 
will feel himself isolated, no one deprived of a guide, abandoned 
to himself or deprived of the aid and advice of his brethren in 
the priesthood. Wherefore, as our predecessors commended most 
highly this very useful Institute, so do we freely and fully 
commend it, especially in these troublous times, which seem to 
demand its operations. Kqv, we exhort all secular pritsts to join 
that most salutary Union, both for /heir own sake and for the sake 
of religion. They should be moved to do so, seeing that it is 
almost evident that this Institution is now called into life again 
by Providence itself, in aid of the suffering Church. They 
should be moved to join by a consideration of the divine 
blessing, by the aid of which, only, could the Union have made 
such progress in a biief period in the face of so many ob- 
stacles. To these motives add the plaudits of the episcopacy, 
the unintermitted praises of the Apostolic See, the visible fruits 
already produced : and that these fruits will go on continually 
increasing, the diffusion of the Associa ion is itself the best 
warrant. And for it we presage the fullest increase of these 
good fruits, for the sanctification of the clergy, and for the 
glory of our most holy religion. Meantime, as an auspice of 
the divine favor, and a pledge of our paternal benevolence, we 
lovingly impart, Beloved Son, to yourself, to the entire Associa- 

carentem. Quamobrem si Decessores Nostri amplissimis commendarunt 
launibus utilissimum hoc Institutum ; id ultro libenterque, et Nos f.tcimus 
potissimum in tanta temporum difficultate quns iliius opem plane postulate 
videtur ; imo quolquot stint saculares sacerdotes hortaiintr, nt sibi ipsis reiqtte 
religiose efficaciiis prospecturi saluberrima: isti consociatwni doit nomen. 
Moveat eos baud obscurum divinoe Providentiae placilum quce nunc denuo susci- 
tavit hoc Institutum in Ecclesice SUDS laborantis subsidium. Moveant coelestes 
benedictiones, quibus inter gravissimas difficultates brevi hujus operis incre- 
menta mirabiliter provecta fuerunt. Moveant episcoporum plausus, constantes 
Apostolioe hujus Sedis laudes, fructus iam parti: quos semper uberiores 
propagatio ipsa consociationis merito spondet. IIos Nos amplissimos ipsi 
ominamur in cleri sanctificationem religionisque Nostrre sanctissimre gloriam ; 
dum superni favoris auspicem et paternae Nostrae benevolentioe pignus. tibi, 
Dilecte Fili, toti, cui proees, Consociationi, et iis omnibus qui eidem daturi 
sunt nomen, Apostolicam benedictionem ptramanter impertimus. 

Datum Romce apud S. Petrum, die 31 Maji 1880, Pontificatus Nostri Anno 

Dilecto Filio 

VICTORI LEBEURIER, Canonico Aurelianensi, 
Praeposito Generali Consociationis Apostolicoe. 


tion of which you are president, and to all who will in future 
become members, the Apostolic benediction. 

Given at St. Peter's, Rome, this thiity-first day of May, 
1880, in the third year of our Pontificate. 

To our Beloved Son, 

VICTOR LEBEURIER, canon of Orleans, 
President- General of the Apostolic Union. 


In memory of his golden jubilee, the Holy Father has 
instituted a new berretta, the purple. Its use is granted to all patri- 
archs, archbishops and bishops. Heretofore only two kinds were 
in use ; the red, worn by cardinals, and the black, worn by 
all others. The berretta of bishops was distinguished from that 
of priests and other clerics only by the tuft of green silk on 
top. (Martinucci, v. 2, u.) Rejoicing at the unprecedented 
demonstrations of devotion to the Holy See evoked by his 
jubilee, Leo XIII. is desirous that the memory thereof shall not pass 
away. To the piety and fidelity of the shepherds of the flock 
throughout the world, the bishops, he mainly attributes the 
fidelity of the faithful to their religion and to the See of Peter. 
In instituting the purple berretta his object is not only to keep 
the occasion of his jubilee in perpetual remembrance, but 
also to testify his appreciation of the labors and devotedness of 
his Venerable Brethren. He is not without hope that through 
the piety awakened at the celebration, and the many prayers 
offered for the Head of the Church, and the novenas made, 
the Lord will be propitiated and deliver the Church from her 
present calamities. 


AD PERPETUAM REI MEMORiAM. Prajclaro divinis gratiae munere 
effectum est, ut Sacerdotalis Nostras consecrationis diem quinqua- 
gesimo anno redeuntem frequenti Episcoporum Venerabilium 
fratrum Nostrorum corona septi, innumero fidelium costu stipati, 
quin et universo Christiano orbe gestiente, celebrare potuerimus. 


Cui tantae celebritati fastigium impositum est majoribus coelitum 
honoribus, quos divino Spiritu adspirante suprema auctoritate 
Nostra nonnullis eximiae sanctitatis viris solemni ritu attribuimus. 
Quae quidem omnia non uno Nobis nomine grata et perjucunda 
fuerunt. Piimo enim in spem adducimur, fore ut fidelium pre- 
cibus ac novensilium Sanctorum intercessione propitiatus Deus, 
tot lantisque, quibus humana premitur societas, malis opportuna 
afferat remedia, optatamque mundo pacem ac tranquillitatem 
largiatur. Deinde vero ex eo lastamur, quod innumerabiles 
observantiae et obsequii significationes, quibus Nos toto orbe 
fideles unanimi consensione prosecuti sunt, turn ostendunt et 
antiquam pietatem et Apostolicae Sedis amorem Christianis pecto- 
ribus alte manere defixum, turn in summim Venerabilium 
Fratrum sacrorum Antistitum laudem cedunt, quorum opera ac 
virtute in populis sibi commendatis et concreditis in tanta 
temporum perversiiate ita viget ac floret Catholicae religionis 
cultus, et huic Sedi ac Romano Pontifici sunt animi addicli 
atque conjuncti. Nos ne fausti hujus eventus memoria inter- 
cidat, atque ut publicum aliquod benevolentias Nostrae testimonium 
Venerabilibus Fratribus exhibeamus, externo honoris insigni 
universes terrarum orbis Antistites exornandos censuimus. Quare 
hisce litteris Apostolica auctoritate Nostra perpetuum in modum 
concedimus, ut universi Patriarchae, Archiepiscopi, et Episcopi 
birreto violacei coloris hoc futurisque temporibus uti libere et 
licite possint et valeant. Hoc ita illis proprium volumus, ut 
alius, qui episcopali dignitate non sit insignitus, ejusmodi orna- 
mento nullatenus potiri queat. Non obstantibus Constitutionibus 
et sanctionibus Apostolicis, ceterisque omnibus, licet speciali et 
individua mentione ac derogatione dignis, in contrarium facienti- 
bus quibuscumque. Datum Romae apud Sanctum Petrum sub 
Annulo Piscatoris die 3 Februarii, mdccclxxxviii, Pontificatus 
Nostri Anno Decimo. 


Bonum nobis est quod aliquando habeamus aliquas gravitates 
et contrarietates. Bonum est quod patiamur quandoque contra- 
dictiones, et quod male et imperfecte de nobis sentiatur, etiamsi 
bene agimus et intendimus. Tune enim melius interiorem tes- 
tem Deum quaeremus quando foris vilipendimur ab hominibus, 
et non bene nobis creditur. 




Franciscus in Germania degens matrimonium nullo impedimento prohi- 
hitum cum Rosa coram parocho rite init. Aliquibus mensibus elapsis, 
niatrimonio rato sed non consummato, Franciscus Rosaque votum perpetuae 
castitatis emittunt. Octo post annos, voto semper servato, Franciscus Rosae 
aliquam ob causam in American! proficisci quaeren'i iter ingrecli concedit. 

Voti emissi immemor, Ro?a in America sine Francisci permissu diviti 
viro nubit, et libeii nascuntun 

Quicritnr : 

1. An hoc ultimum quasi-matiimonium revalidari potest siiie Francisci 
consensu ? 

2. An Papa hoc in casu dispensationem impertiri potest, Francisco con- 
tradicente ? 

3. An Rosn, qurerens Catholice vivere, relinquere debet virum nescientem 
nullitatem sui matrimonii, et ad priorem maritum, sua jura poscentem, 
reverti ? 

N. G. 

It is obvious that a discussion on this subject would be of 
very little interest to the readers of THE PASTOR. We must 
content ourselves, then, with referring Father G. to Feije, De 
Impediments, nn. 600-611. (In last edition pp. 500-515.) "Olim 
quidem " he writes " multum disputabatur de Rom. Pontificis 
potestate dispensandi in matrimonio rato, non consummato, sed 
hodie fas non est earn in dubium vocare ; earn enim probat 
traditio, observantia, seu continuata plurium sseculorum praxis 
Sedis Apostolicae, unde interpretatio juris divini optime colligi- 

That the Pope can dispense in the marriage between Francis 
and Rose, and also in their simple vow of chastity, there can 
be no doubt. If the Pope dispense, each is free to marry 
again. The reluctance of Francis to accept the dispensation 
does not impair the power of the Pope. That power exists 
entirely independeut of the will or wishes of Francis. And 
" hujus potestatis exercitae multa sunt exempla turn antiqua 
turn recentia." Feije. The author adduces some scores of recent 
instances, p. 829. When this disp. is sought, " alterius consensu 
opus non est." De Impedimentis , p. 502. 


What is the character of the causes which may induce the 
Holy See to grant the extraordinary dispensation must be seen 
in Feijie 1. c., or in the writings of other canonists. A priest in 
the United States would refer the case of Rose to his bishop. 
There, his business with the matter ends. The bishop would 
enquire into all the circumstances of the case, and if he reach 
the conclusion that, in view of all things, the double dispensa- 
tion, in Rose's vow and in matrimonio non consummalo, 
might probably or possibly be obtained, he would refer the case 
to Rome. But neither will the bishop, as a mle, refer the case, 
nor will the Holy See be likely to grant the dispensation, 
owing to the impossibility of establishing in Rose's present state 
the non-consummation. ' Ut haec dispensatio obtineatur, requiritur 
i plena probatio matrimonium non fuisse consummatum ; quam- 
quam autem ratum tantum hoc manet, si solummodo ante 
matrimonium copula perfecta intercessit, patet tamen in isto casu 
nonnisi in extraordinariis omnino circumstantiis posse probationem 
haberi earn non fuisse secutam post initum matrimonium." Feije, 
1. c. 

If circumstances " omino extraordinarise" exist, by which the 
non consummation can be proved, and the circumstances be found 
satisfactory in the curia dicecesana, the ordinary may deem it 
proper to proceed further. 

Multam possemus pacem habere, si non vellemus nos cum 
aliorum dictis et factis, quoe ad nostram curam non spectant, 
occupare. Quomodo potest ille diu in pace manere, qui alienis 
curis se intermiscet ? 

Well, Johnny, did you hear that great sermon last night? 

Yes sir. 

Johnny, that priest is one of the best Lenten preachers in 
the country. 

I dont care, Sir, I dont like him. The minute he came 
back to the sacris'y he burst out laughing when shaking hands 
with Father N., and all the people outside a'most crying. 

After preaching, " sapere aude." 



NEW YORK, March. 1888. 

RtV. SIR : Will you say whether there is an authoritative version of the 
"Litany of the Sacred Heart;" and if so, what is it? Every prayer book 
I see has a different rendering. By answering you will greatly oblige 


The word authoritative in this connection may need explanation. 
If it mean txclusiveiy authorized: there is no such litany of the 
Sacred Heart. If it mean authorized by the Church as liturgical, 
as is the Litany of Loretto : there is no such litany of the Sacred 
Heart. If the word mean simply authorized : there are several 
such litanies of the Sacred Heart. 

The supervision of all prayer books, either published or 
circulated in his diocese, is among the duties of the Ordinary. 
Every prayer book should be submitted to the bishop of the 
place before being published, not precisely for his approbation, 
but that he may be able to know that the book contains no 
extravagant, ridiculous, or unusual devotional methods, or, possibly, 
errors in dogma. He can then give it his Imprimatur, which? 
in the case of prayer books, means a great deal more than in 
the case of other books. In proof of what is here said, it will 
be sufficient to quote the decree numbered in Gardellini 5703 : 

(< The editor of a certain Catholic paper published in New York 
petitoned the Sacred Congregation to pronounce whether it is 
not forbidden to have the Latin text of the Ordo Afissce, and 
especially of the Canon, accompanied in books of devotion by a 
translation in the vernacular? The Sacred Congregation replied: 
'The books and translations in question are placed by the 
Sacred Canons and Apostolic decisions entirely under the 
authority of the bishops. Hence the faithful are not al'owed 
to use any editions of such books published without episcopal 
approbation. ' " ' 

1 Director quarumdam ephemeridum Catholicarum, quse typis cuduntur 
Neo-Eboraci, a Sacra Rituum Congregatione declarari petiit num prohibitum 
sit in libris nuncup.itis Devotionis textui Latino Ordinis Miss<z ac praesertim 
Canonis addere versionem in lingua vulgari ? 

Sacra vero Rituum Congregatio, referente infrascripto secretario, audito 
voto R. P. D. Laurentii Salvati, S. Fidei Promotoris, declarare censuit : 
Libros eorumque vemones in lingua vernacula, de quibus agitur, a canonicis 


Hence prayer books bearing the Ordinary's Imprimalur are 
authorized, not authoritative, and litanies found in these prayer 
books are authorized, as they read. 

What our correspondent remarks in regard to the litany of 
the Sacred Heart, is true. There are different versions in different 
compilations ; bat most probably all have been authorized at one 
time or another. It does not follow, because a prayer book is 
published without the Imprimalur, that its litanies or prayers are 
not authorized. The publication, the book as it stands, is 
not. But its compiler may have taken every prayer and litany 
in it from approved editions. The book is to be denounced 
irrespective of its contents. 

Of several different litanies of the Sacred Heart that we have 
taken occasion to look over, that given in the Cceltste Palmetum, ' 
seems to us beyond comparison the best. If some compiler of 
a prayer book would furnish us with a smooth and racy 
translation of this, it would be certain to supersede all others. 
Few, however, are qualified to make such a translation, as few 
are qualified to write good poetry. 

It may be here pertinent to quote a Moniium of the S. R. C. : 
"Although no litanies but those of the Holy Name, of the 
Blessed Virgin Mary, commonly styled of Loretto, and the litanies 
of the Saints which are found in the Breviary and Ritual, have 
been approved by the Holy See, others are published, never- 
theless, to be recited by the faithful in honor of some saint or 
mystery, and are found in books of piety, especially in those 
generally known as books of devotion books sometimes issued 
with the sanction of ecclesiastical authority. Hence the Sacred 
Congregation of Rites deems it its duty to admonish ordinaries 
not to allow the public recitation of any litanies but those men- 
tioned, or those which the Holy Office may hereafter acknowledge 
and approve ; and they should likewise take care not to give 
their approbation to books in which litanies destitute of apos- 
tolical sanction are inserted. " 

S. R. C., June i6th, 1880. 

praescriptionibus et Apostolicis decretis episcoporum auctoritaii omnino 
reservari ; ideoque licitum non esse fidelibus horum uti editionibus, nisi 
stse expressam prreseferant episcoporum adprobationem. Atque ita declaravit 
die 4 Augusti, 1877. (5703.) 

1 Editio expurgata, Pustet, 1882. 


In some quarters the foregoing Monilum gave rise to confusion 
and misunderstandings. An official explanation \vas requested. 
The following was furnished : 

" MOST RKV. LORD AXD BROTHER . Explaining that the decisions 
of the Holy See in regard to the approbation of litanies by 
ordinaries, and especially the Monilum of the i6th of June, 
1880, are understood in various and different ways, your Lord- 
ship has requested this Sacred Congregation to give an authentic 
interpretation thereof. This Sacred Congregation then, having 
accurately examined the questions proposed, judged proper to 
reply to all by the following single response : The Monilum re- 
ferred to, applies to the litanies to be used in liturgical and public 
functions; but as to other litanies, or new ones, ordinaries not 
only may, but ought to examine them, and approve, them, if 
expedient ; but this, only fur private and extra-liturgical use" 

S. R. C., October 29th, 1882. 


An transferri possit dies consecrationis propter anniversarium 
in aliam diem diversam ab ilia, in qua facta est consecratio ? 

Resp. S. R. C. : Potest transferri, dummodo sit deputatus dies 
anniversarii . ab episcopo in actu consecrationis ecclesiae. (2343.) 


Utrum occurrente in Dominica Ssmas Trinitatis sive diebus 
festis sanctorum Apostolorum et similium anniversario dedicationis 
alicujus ecclesise liceat, etc. 

Resp. S. R. C. : In festo Ssmoe Trinitatis quoad missas ser- 
vandas esse rubricas Missalis de translatione festorum. Quoad 
officium vero transferenduin rllud de anniversario dedicationis, et 
recitandum officium de Trinitate, utpote privilegiatum ut in rubiicis 
Breviarii de translatione festorum n. i. In festis vero sanctorum 
Apostolorum, quae celebrantur sub ritu dupl. 2 cl. et similibus 
non privilegiatis, officium et missam fieri de dedicatione et 
festum Apostolorum transferri in primam diem non impeditam. 
(2873 ) 

"Be not wise in thy own conceit." Prov. iii. 7. 


AH publications to be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the Editor, Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranford, N. J. 

THE CHURCH AND THE AGE : An Exposition of the Catholic Church in 
view of the Needs and Aspirations of the Present Age. By Very 
Rev. I. T. Hecker. Octavo, cloth, pp. 311. New York: Office of the 
Catholic World, 6 Park Place. 

This work is divided into twelve parts, each being a whole 
in itself. The principal one is tae first from which the volume 
takes its title. The headings of the divisions are (i) The 
Church, in view of the Needs of the Age : (2) Relation of 
Church and State in America : (3) Cardinal Gibbons and 
American Institutions: (4) Catholicity and the Italian People : 
(5) The Church and France: (6) St. Catherine of Genoa: (7) 
Catholicity and the Tendencies of the Age : (8) The Experi- 
ment of Protestantism : (9) Protestantism and the Church : (ic) 
The Spiritual World and The Rule of Faith: (11) Unitarian- 
ism and The Fatherhood of God : (12) The Transcendental Move- 
ment in New England. 

Fcr the present we must confine our remarks to the first 
part. But in that, the fundamental ideas that run through the 
-whole work are nearly all expressed. We are struck with the 
novelty of many of the writer's thoughts, as much as with their 
profundity. While we cannot entirely agree with his every 
proposition, nor share his optimistic views of the future of the 
Catholic Church, we gladly acknowledge our indebtedness to 
The Church and the Age for a clearer and more logical con- 
ception of many of the forces at work in modern society. 

The book opens with a "Statement of the Question'" as. be- 
tween the Church and the Age : In countries Catholic as well as 
Protestant all those who influence society are in deadly hostility 
to the Catholic Church. Where the children of the Church far 
outnumber her enemies, the children are supine and look on 
with indifference or placidity, while every outrage is perpetrated 
against the religion they profess. 

Protestantism, defined " an exaggerated development of personal 
independence, directed to the negation of the divine authority of 
the Church," is declared to be the remote cause of the hos- 
tility of one class, and of the indifference of the other. 

Meeting this attack "the chief occupation of the Church for 
the last three hundred years was the maintenance of her divine 

Pending the pressing necessity of defending the authority of 


the Church, an authority wielded by the Popes, "the society 
of St. Ignatius was born. Tne Papacy was the point of attack. 
The papal authority was denied. Against it millions were in 
revolt. The prevailing sin of the time was disobedience. In 
opposition to the current, the children of St. Ignatius must 
make a special vow of obedience to the Holy Father. 

The way to root out a vice is to enforce the practice of the 
opposite virtue. The confessional and spiritual direction are the 
best means of enforcing a virtue. By these means as well as 
by the excellence of their preachers and spiritual writers, the 
Jesuits prevented millions from following in the great revolt, 
and brought other millions who had fallen away, back to their 

[We shall not quarrel with this pet theory of the author, as 
we shall have to note the peculiar inferences he draws from it 
later on. The notion was always very common, however, and 
still is, that the surprising influence which the Society exerted 
was mainly due to their intellectual superiority and to the 
training of youth to which they always devoted their best men 
and best efforts.] 

As the authority of the Church was the object of attack, all 
her energies were naturally bent towards its defence, and logically 
towards inculcating unquestioning obedience. The result was 
that " the defence of the Church and the salvation of the soul 
were ordinarily secured at the expense, necessarily, of those 
virtues which properly go to make up the strength of Christian 

[If we divine the author's meaning correctly, it is safe to say 
that no Jesuit would have written that sentence; nor would 
every secular priest subscribe to the proposition that the teach- 
ing or preaching of the virtus of obedience, or, specifically, of 
obedience to the Holy See, tends to uproot any virtues which 
"go to make up the strength of Christian manhood." True 
Christian obedience is intellectual, reasonable, and cheerfully 
paid, where due and when, by all manly, intellectual, reasonable 
men. In paying such obedience the man honors himself, and 
becomes more a man.] 

Meek obedience inculcated morning, noon, and night, resulted 
for Catholics in decreased action in the natural order ; and this 
is " why fifty millions of Protestants have had a controlling in- 
fluence, for a long period, over two hundred millions of Catholics 



in directing the movements and destinies of nations, and why 
Catholics are at this moment almost everywhere oppressed and 
persecuted by very inferior numbers." 

"Is there a way out? The meditation of the great truths of 
Christian faith is the source from which the inspiration must 
come, if society is to be regenerated." That is the "way out." 
A very sure way, too, if only the millions that make up the 
several nations could be induced to make all together a thirty 
days retreat. 

Under the caption "Mission of the Holy Spirit," there are 
some strange expressions savoring strongly of Fenelon's Quietism. 
As the author is well aware that this Quietism has been con- 
demned, Quietism he certainly cannot mean when he writes: "The 
whole aim of the science of Christian perfection is to instruct 
men how to remove the hindrances in the way of the action of 
the Holy Spirit" in the soul. "Thus the sum of spiritual life 
consists in observing and yielding to the movements of the Spirit 
of God in our soul. That divine action, which is the immediate 
and principal cause of the salvation and perfection of the soul, claims, 
by right, the soul's direct and main attention. From this source within 
the soul" namely the divine action "there will gradually come 
to birth a consciousness of the indwelling presence of the Holy 
Spirit out of which " out of the consciousness, or out of the 
indwelling presence, which ? " will spring a force surpassing all 
human strength, a courage higher than all human heroism, a 
sense of dignity excelling all human greatness. The light which 
the Age requires for its renewal can come only from the same 
source. The radical and adequate remedy for all the evils of 
our Age consists in increased attention and fidelity to the action 
of the Holy Spirit in the soul." 

The words quoted might as well be Pollypuck or whatever 
they call the new language. To our minds they have no mean- 
ing. If attention " to the action of the Holy Spirit in the soul," 
be the " way out," the gate is securely barred to modern 
society to the Age, and it will remain so. 

Though we may be able to affix a meaning to many of the 
author's propositions, it is not easy to see what meaning he 
himself attached to them. Thus : "In case of obscurity or 
doubt concerning what is the divinely revealed truth, or 
whether what prompts the soul is, or is not, an inspiration of the 
Holy Spirit, recourse must be had to the divine teacher or cri- 


terion, the authority of the Church. For it must be borne in 
mind that to the Church, as represented in the first instance 
by St. Peter, and subsequently by his successors, was made the 
promise of her Divine Founder that the gates of hell should 
never prevail against her. No such promise was made to any 
individual believer." 

In case of obscurity or doubt as to whether what prompts the 
soul is, or is not, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit," Liguori, 
Rodriguez, Scaramelli, Faber, would not suggest a visit to the 
Holy Father, but some searching humiliations, and some repul- 
sive acts of mortification, with the most absolute obedience to con- 
fessor or director. In the remainder of this first part of his 
work, the author indulges his fancy. He says some very fine 
things, but every page would furnish several theses for a college 
debating society. He concludes : " During the last three cen- 
turies, from the nature of the woik the Church had to do, 
the weight of her influence had to be mainly exerted on the 
side of restraining human activity. Her present and future 
influence,' due to the completion of her external organization 
will be exerted on the side of soliciting increased action. The 
first was necessarily repressive and unpopular : the second will 
be, on the contrary, expansive and popular. The one excited 
antagonism, the other will attract sympathy and cheerful co- 
operation. The former restraint was exercised not against human 
activity, but against the exaggeration of that activity. The future 
will be the solicitation of the same activity towards its elevation 
and divine expansion, enhancing its fruitfulness and glory." 

Notwithstanding all these and similar fine words we are quite 
certain that the Old Church will jog along her old gait. No- 
where is there the slightest sign of change. The individual as 
well as society are prone to evil, naturally tending to evil. 
The work of the Church is a never-ending one, that of stemming 
the rush of men and women upon evil ways, upon irreligion, 
and rebellion against the Most High. Man is impatient of 
restraint. Non serviam is his most natural expression. The 
Church's mission is to teach man that only by serving can 
he be saved. This she has been thundering into men's ears 
from the beginning. Her teaching is unwelcome to the world, 
but she has none other to substitute. The future will he even 
as the past. The wise ones among the children of men will 
hearken to the voice of the Church. They will submit their 


intellects to faith, and their necks to the yoke of Christ. But the 
Gentiles will remain to gnash their teeth, and the peoples will 
continue to carry on their vain machinations. Those who are 
dissatisfied with the old ways, and look forward to some extra- 
ordinary effusion of the Ho'y Spirit, that will transform the 
world, and send the people of the world by the million 
rushing for admission to the One True Church these are 
dreamers and doomed to disappointment. 

We expect to return in a future number to this interesting 
work The Church and the Age. 

THE LAKE. Octavo, cloth, pp. 302. (The Hearth and Home 
Library.) Thomas B. Noonan & Co., Boston, 1888. 

Gabrielle is a bright story, airy, delightful, and healthy as a 
breezy morning in June. As a translation from the German 
it could hardly be better. However, we would suggest to the 
publisher to have it revised for the next edition, and alter a 
few expressions of doubtful propriety, as: " Elsa well-nigh 
jumps out of her skin for very joy;" p. 153. In the persistent 
use of a foreign word or two in an English sentence there is 
a bit of silliness. All should be translated except the one 


PERCY'S REVENGE: A STORY FOR BOYS. By Clara Mulholland. Octavo, 
cloth, pp. 320. (The Hearth and Home Library.) Thomas B. 
Noonan & Co., Boston, 1887. 

This little volume is quite Unitarian. God's forgivingness is 
preached ad nauseam to the desponding Percy. But not an 
allusion is made to the basis of that forgiveness, Christ. A foil 
to the irrvxscible lad, Percy, is the good boy, Hugh, with a head 
of 60 years on his shoulders. Younger than Percy, Hugh, at 
nine or ten, becomes his senior's " guide, philosopher, and friend." 
Boys in real life who read the story, will only laugh at Hugh 
Brown. He is good because he grew so, like the potatoes. If 
the authoress is lacking in philosophy, she certainly is not in 
style. It is easy and natural, and just the one to suit young 
people, and, for that matter, old, too. 

23. John Murphy & Co. 

The smaller of these pamphlets consists mainly of a series of 
letters of encouragement addressed to the Rev. John R. Slattery 


by different bishops, to go on with the work he has undertaken 
of founding in Baltimore a seminary for the education of 
Josephite priests. Josephite priests are secular priests, but subject 
not to any bishop in particular, but to the Propaganda, through 
the superior of St. Joseph's Society. The Josephite priest is 
essentially a missionary priest. " He keeps himself in readiness 
to go forth to whatever mission may be assigned him." Rule, 
p. 19. As soon as he ceases, from whatever cause, to be a 
missionary, he ceases to be a Josephite. 

The first house of the Josephite missionaries was established 
at Mill Hill, England. Thence came F r - Slattery and a few 
companions, many years ago, at the pressing request of American 
bishops. Bishop Janssens writes : 

The bishops of the South must feel the great responsibility that burdens 
their consciences for the salvation ot the millions of the colored race 
wi.hiu their diocese. I, for one, feel also the difficulties that surround the 
accomplishment of this task. Our priests everywhere in the Southern 
States are devoted to their duty, and willing, too, to work for the colored 
people as well as for the white. But the work for the one and for the 
other is quite different, and it is almost impossible to do much for the 
negro, whilst engaged in the ministry for the whites. 

And Bishop Curtis : 

In the diocese of Wilmington alone, there must be more than one 
hundred thousand colored people, and yet I doubt whether, among them 
all, one hundred be Catholics. And at present little is doing, or can be 
done, towards winning them to the Church. And little can be done till 
we have men called to, and educated for, this particular mission. 

It is unnecessary to quote further to this effect. Eveiy 
priest in the ministry, North or South, feels that, while 
ministering to the whites, he cannot attract the colored people. 
The hope is entertained by the bishops that through a band of 
Josephites, trained here in America, and devoted by vo\v and 
vocation to the evangelization of the Afro-Americans exclusively, 
this work, admittedly beyond the power of the ordinary diocesan 
clergy, may through God's blessing be in great measure accom- 
plished. Father Slattery may rest assured that he has the best 
wishes of every clergyman in the United States for his success. 
As the Venerable Father Parke writes him, We have given the 
work up in despair. 

7,000,000 negroes are in the whole United States. 500,000 live in the 
Northern and Western States, from Maine to Oregon. 

1,500,000 live in Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia, Tennessee, Missouri, 
Arkansas, and Texas. 


5,OOO,OOO dwell between the Potomac and the Gulf. IN THE 


Religious belief of the colored people. 

3,000,000 communicants and members, all told, are claimed by the various 
Protestant sects. 100,000 hardly are Catholics. 

3,000,000, and more, consequently, have no professed religion. 

These pamphlets can be had from the publisher or from F. 
Slattery, on application. The pamphlets should be read by 
every priest and distributed among the charitable. 

HARMONIOUS DEVELOPMENT: A Paper rend before the Members of the 
Sanitary Convention at Manchester, New Hampshire, January 25111, 
1887, by Bro. Noah of The Brothers of tJu- Christian Schools. 

TACT JN TEACHING: A Paper read before the Board of Regents, Sate 
of New York, at Albany, by Bro. Noah. New York Catholic Protectory. 

Both papers are bound in an octavo pamphlet of 21 pages. 
Not the extensive reading of Bro. Noah, nor his elegant 
diction, nor his keen philosophical observations, nor his easy, 
lucid, though severely logical, argumentation, so much surprise 
us in these papers, as the glimpse we therein get of that 
wondrously gifted teacher, the Blessed De la Salle. In the 
science of teaching not a single step in advance of De la Salle 
has yet been made in any quarter. All school teachers, and 
indeed the teachers of teachers will read these papers of Bro. 
Noah with pleasure, and we venture to say not without profit. 

THIRY, S. J., Director, Receipts and Expenses from January I, 1887, to 
January I, 1888. 

Receipts : $8,882,^2. 

Expenses : $200,96. 

Transmitted : $8, 703,02. 

THE HOLY AXGELS. By the Rev. R. O'Kennedy. Octavo, cloth, gilt edges, 
p. 266. The Cath. Publication Society Co., 1888. 

Ram. Octavo, cloth, pp. 283. The Cath. Publication Society Co., 1888. 

PRINCE OF THE APOSTLES. Proved from the Fathers' History and 
Archaelogy ; and illustrated by Arguments from other Sources. By the 
Rev. T. Livins, C. SS. R., M. A. Oriel College, Oxford. Large octavo, 
cloth, pp. xxi 560. London : Burns and Oates. New York : Catholic 
Publication Society Co., 1888. 

THE CHAIR OF PETER : or THE PAPACY considered in its Institution, 


Development and Organization, and in the Benefits which, for over 
Eighteen Centuries, it has conferred on Mankind. By John Nicholas 
Murphy, Roman Count. Octavo, cloth, pp. xvi 714. London : Burns 
and Oaies. New York : Catholic Publication Society Co. 

ARY OF THE ENGLISH CATHOLICS : from the Breach with Rome, in 
1534, to the Present Time. By Joseph Gillow. Vol. III. Octavo, cloth, 
pp. XV -688 embracing the names from "Graham" to " Kemble." Lon- 
don: Burns and Gates. New York : The Cath. Publication Society Co. 

WHATEVER is, WAS : In Nature there are no such Things as Cause, 
Effect, Generation, Growth, nor Death. No Time, no Past, no Future. 
Logical Conclusions deduced from the Theory. The Self-Existence of 
the Universe. Also, A Critical Examination into the Foundation on 
which rests the Philosophy of Herbert Spencer, and the Theories of 
Charles Darwin : together with a New Theory for the Origin of the 
World :--for all Forms, Organic and Inorganic. Also, the Natural 
Cause of the Continuing Existence of all Living Things, and Species 
of Things: and the Finding of the Supposed "Missing Link." By 
Geo. A. Young. Large octavo, cloth, pp. xv 481. New York: Leg- 
get Brothers. San Frircisco: A. J. Leary. 

THE GLORIES OF MARY. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori. Doctor of the 
Church. Edited hy Rev. Eugene Grimm, C. SS. R. (Centenary edition 
of the Complete Ascetical Works.) Two volumes, oc'avo, cloth, pp. 
474-469. Xew York, Cincinnati, and Chicago: Benziger Bros., 1887. 

MARTYRS OF THE CHURCH. By St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor ot 
the Church. Edited by Rev. Eugene Grimm, C. SS. R. (Centenary 
edition of the Complete Ascetical Works of St. Alphonsus, vol. ix.) 
Octavo, cloth, pp. 479. New York, Cincinnati, and Chicago: Benziger 
Bros. 1888. 

Octavo, cloth, pp. 463. New York : The Catholic Publication Society 
Co. London: Burns and Gates, 1888. 

DE SPIRI^U SOCIETATIS JESU : Auctore Julio Costa Rossetti, ejusdem 
Societatis sacerdote. Duodecimo, half morocco, pp. xvi 288. St. Louis, 
Mo : Herder. 

STORIES FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS: for the Time before and after Holy 
Communion, drawn from the best Authorities : by Rev. Joseph A. 
Keller. Translated, with permission o r the author, by Frances M. Kemp. 
321110, gilt boards, pp. 224. New York : Benziger Brothers, 1888. 

Appendix containing all Vesper Psalms and the Magnificat, the Responses 
for Vespers, the Antiphons of the B. V. M., and Various Hymns for 
Benediction. Designed for ' the use of Catholic Choirs and Schools, by 
J. Singenberger, Kt. etc. Boards, small octavo, pp. 98. Pustet & Co. 

[Some of these works zvjiks deserve a more extended notice than we could 
find space for in this number, ,] 

"Of/o magis sen/ire compunctionem quam scire ejus definitionem. " a Kcmpis. 


APRIL, 1888. 

No. 6. 


The Holy Father seems not only not to forget a duty, but 
never to omit doing at the opportune time what is becoming. 
Never did the world witness such a celebration as his jubilee. 
No Catholic doubts that the jubilee was kept in heaven too. The 
Church triumphant joined with the Church militant in rendering 
thanks to God for the favors bestowed on Leo XIII. But 
amid the rejoicing, Leo's ear was attentive to the De profundis of 
the Holy Souls. To them too he is anxious to extend the 
joyfulness evoked by his jubilee. He does so by the encyclical 
just issu f d. He directs all ordinaries to join with him in having, 
each in his -own Cathedral, a solemn mass for the dead on 
the last Sunday of next September. He also directs that all 
priests, seculars and regulars, say their mass that day for the 
poor souls. The only exception is that a mass of the day be 
not omitted in churches wherein exists the obligatio chori. 
The faithful he earnestly exhorts to make a special communion 
on the same day for the souls in purgatory, and to all who do 
so he grants a plenary indulgence. On that day all cele- 
brants will have the privilege of the altar. 






Quod anniversarius Sacerdotii Nos:ri dies quinquagesimus nuper Ecclesice 
peroptato illuxerit, acceptum, ut oportet, referimus suvnmae Dei benigniiati, 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved.. 


cujus nutu arbitrioque providentissimo omnis vita hominum regitur. Ac 
pari modo tantam ubique animorum consensionem in obsequiis, in effu>a 
liberalitate, in publicis laetitioe significationibus nemo poterat nisi Ille exci- 
tare, cujus omnino imperium est in hominum mentes et voluntates et corda, 
quique eventus rerum ad christianae religionis gloriam dirigit et moderatur. 
Praeclarum quidem et memorabile factum, ex quo ipsi Ecclesiae hostes, 
vel inviti et nolentes, suis ipsi oculis perspiciunt, quemadmodum divina 
ejus vita ac divinitus ingenita virtus vigeat semper, atque adio persuadere 
sibi cogantur, insano proisus conatu gentes impias fiemere et inania 
meditari adversus Dominum et adversus Christum ejus. 

Jamvero, ut quam latissime hujus beneficii divini et memoria manaret et 
utilitas, cselestium gratiarum thesauros universe Nobis concredito gregi 
reclusimus : nee sane praetermisimus divinas pietatis munera iis ipsis 
implorare, qui extra unicam salutis Arcam adhuc versantur : quod hoc 
consilio fecimus, ut omnes gentes et populi, in fide carilatis vinculo sociati, 
unico oviii stib uno pastore citius aggregentur : ita sane Dominum Nostrum 
Jesum Christum cum gemitibus exoravimus in solemni Sacro Canonizationis 
mox celebratae. 

Nos enim et ad triumphantem Ecclesiam sublatis oculis, heroibus 
christianis, de quibus jam absoluta feliciter erat praestantissimarum virtutum 
ac miraculorum nd juris tramites cognitio, aliis sanctorum summos honores, 
aliis beatorum cultum solemniter decrevimus et tribuirnus, ut ea quae in 
caelis est Hierusalem, cum hac ipsa quae in terris peregriratur a Domino, 
communione laetitiae jungeretur. 

Verum quo huic ipsi rei veluti cumulus, Deo adjuvante, imponatur, 
Apostolicae Nostrae caritatis officia, de plenitudine infiniti spiritualis thesauri, 
ad eos quoque dilectos Ecclesia; filios, largius quo fieri possit, proferre 
cupimus, qui morte justorum obita de militia hujus vitae migrarunt cum 
signo fidei, ac mysticae vitis inserti propagini ; ita tamen ut prohibeantur 
ingressu in aeternam requiem usque dum divinae justitiae ulirici pro con- 
tractis debitis ad minimum reddant quadrantem. Movemur autem turn piis 
catholicorum votis, quibus consilium hoc Nostrum pergratum esse, scimus, 
turn Incrimabili pnenarum, quibus defunctorum animae cruciantur, atrocitate: 
sed praeterea et maxime movemur consuetudine Ecclesiae, quae, vel inter 
jucundiores per annum solemnitates, sanctam et salubrem agit defunctorum 
memoriam, ut a peccatis solvantur. 

Itaque cum ex catholica doctrina exploratum sit animas in Pnrgatorio 
.detenlas fidelium suffiagiis, potissimum vero acceplabili altar is sacrificio, juvari, 
nullum censemus neque utilius neque optatius a Nobis proficisci ad eas 
posse pignus, quam si multiplicemus in locis omnibus pro satisfactione 
ipsarum oblaiionem mundam sacrosancti Sacrificii Mediatoris nostri divini. 

Quare statuimus, cum nece-sariis omnibus dispensationibus et derogationi- 
bus, ultiviam Dominicam proxime uenturi mensis Septembris, tamquam 
amplissimae expiationis diem, quo celebretur a Nobis, itemque a singulis 
fratribus nostris patriarchis, archiepiscopis. episcopis aliisque prjplatis 
dicecesim habentibus, in suis cuju^que ecclesiis patriarchalibus meiropolita- 
nis et cathedralibus, specialis mi-sa defunctorum, majori qua fieri potest 
solemnitate, eoque ri'u qui in missali adsignatur In Commemoratione Om- 
nium Fidelium Defunctorum. Id ipsum fieri probamus in parochialibus et 


collegiatis ecclesiis tam saecularium quam regularium, et ab omnibus sacer- 
dotibus, dummodo ne omittatur missa officio diei respondens, ubicumque 
est obligatio. Alios autem Christifideles vehementer hortamur ut, facta 
sacramentali confessione, ad purgantium animarum sufiragium angelico pane 
se devote reficiant. His vero plenarium Indulgentiam pro defunctis ; sin- 
gulis, ut dictum est supra, celebrantibus, altaris privilegium, auctoritate 
Apostolica impertimur. 

Sic nimirum piae animae in quibus noxarum reliquiae terribili cruciatuum 
magnitudine eluuntur, peropportunum ac singulare solatium percipient ex 
Hostia salutari, quam Ecclesia universa, Capiti suo visibili conjuncta, 
eodemque caritatis affectu inflammata, Deo est oblatura ut eis locum re- 
frigerii, lucis et pacis indulgeat sempiternee. 

Interea Vobis, Venerabiles Fratres, universoque clero et populo curse 
vestrae concredito, Apostolicam benedictionem, caelestium munerum auspicem, 
peramanter in Domino impertimus. 

Datum Romae apud S. Petrum in die solemni Paschatis an. MDCCCLXXXVIII 
Pontificatus Nostri undecimo. 



James sells liquor without a license. Moreover, he sells it 
to all indiscriminately, not even excepting minors ; he also 
carries on the business on Sunday, though it is expressly forbidden 
on that day, both by the civil law and by the Third Council 
of Baltimore. 

Wherefore, Father Thomas, after he had frequently and serious- 
ly but fruitlessly, admonished him, denies him absolution. 
This he does because he thinks that total abstinence, at least in 
this country, is imposed on all by the law of nature, by reason 
of the imminent danger of the great evils which spring from 
drunkenness. Father Thomas also thinks that the civil laws 
and the decrees of Baltimore concerning the sale of liquor 
strictly bind in conscience. 

In the neighborhood of Father Thomas there is another 
confessor, named Father Paul, who holds different views on this 
matter. James goes to him and receives absolution. 

Hence arise the following questions : 

(1) Whether civil laws which forbid those things which are 
not mala in se, oblige in conscience ? 

(2) Whether there is an obligation and, if so, how great is 
the obligation, of observing the statutes touching the liquor traffic, 
which were promulgated by the prelates of Baltimore? 


(3) Whether in carrying on the liquor traffic as stated, James 
did anything against the law of nature ? 

(4) Which of the two confessors acted with the greater 
\v isdom and propriety ? 

In answer to the first question, whether civil laws which 
forbid those things which are not mala in se bind in conscience ? 
All civil laws, per se, bind in conscience if they have proper 
conditions; this all moralists admit. Lehmkuhl says: "Every 
law must suppose some obligation of conscience. Moral and 
penal laws are distinct in this sense, that moral laws bind 
immediately in conscience to do the thing commanded, or 
avoid the thing forbidden ; while penal laws do not absolutely 
oblige to do the thing prescribed by law, but convey only a 
conditional command, so that, if the law is not complied with, 
the penalty or fine attached as the condition for not obeying 
it must be paid when imposed. The civil laws regulating the 
liquor traffic are penal and bind in conscience, so far as the 
penalty is concerned, after sentence has been imposed. 

Theologians give certain rules by which we may know penal 
laws : 

First, from the" very terms of the law wherever it says: 
" Do this or pay the penalty." 

Second, from the declaration of the law-maker himself, if he 
says he does not wish the laws to bind in conscience. 

Third, from established custom, the common practice, especially 
of the conscientious. 

Custom is the best interpreter of the law. The Sunday laws 
and the liquor laws, judged by these standards, are penal 
laws ; those who make these laws so regard them, and common 
custom so treats them. 

Whether there are any laws merely penal cannot, Konings 
says, be answered speculatively, as they may have that character 
in one country but not in another. Only the learned and 
skilful of their own country and nation can judge of this 
matter. He further says : " One might affirm, not without 
reason, in our day, that in many countries all civil laws are 
merely penal laws, and therefore that they are violated in general 
without sin, unless by violating them a divine or ecclesiastical 
law is, at the same time, violated. For such is the very sad 
condition of almost all nations at this time, that legislative assemblies, 
as such, not only do not care to oblige in conscience, but, 


worse than pagans, they do not appear to acknowledge a God, 
as the author of all obligation, and they base all th i law- 
making authority on the power of numbers." 

Lehmkuhl holds the same opinion. Laws derive their 
binding force from the will of the law-maker. But our 
legislatures, in making laws, never think of binding the con- 
science. It is therefore certain that the legislature can, where 
this is sufficient to procure the public good, bind only to pay 
the fine or penalty when imposed for the non-fulfilment of law, 
and need not bind to the actual fulfilment of the law itself. 
The court authorities of our day appear indeed to rely altogether 
on power and force as the means for compelling obedience to law. 

Our second question : Is there an obligation, and if so, 
how great an obligation, of observing the decrees which were 
promulgated by the prelates of Baltimore concerning the Sunday 
liquor laws and the selling of liquor to minors? 

All the decrees of the Council of Baltimore, or any other 
Council, are not commands. Many of them are published for 
pious exhortation and counsel, and therefore are in the nature 
of an exhortation rather than of a command. Many examples 
of this are found in the decrees of the Council of Baltimore. 

How may we know whether a real precept or strict law which 
implies a grave obligation in a grievous matter can be imposed ? 
The very words of the law itself, as well as the interpretation 
put upon it by common acceptation and custom, indicate it. 
But we ought so to interpret the law that where a doubt arises 
it shall be solved so as to impose no obligation to do anything 
which the law does not expressly wish to be done. 

It will materially assist us to correctly measure the relative 
meaning and force of the words in which a law is framed, if 
we classify the terms that express more or less strict obligation, 
and which Renter has thus collated for us : (Lehm.) 

(1) " Praecipio, mando, impero, jubeo, prohibeo, interdico,"- 
all of which imply in themselves a strict obligation, and in a 
matter of weight a grave obligation. 

(2) " Ordinamus, sancimus, statuimus," which do not imply 
a strict obligation. 

(3) " Debet, oportet, fac, abstine, civeant, ne audeant, tene- 
tur," which, as they do not always express a fixed and certain 
obligation, ought to be explained from the context or frcm 
custom interpreting the force of the law. 


How may we know when any law binds sub grcrvi r> The 
following rules are laid down by moralists : i. If the matter 
commanded be of grave moment, and there is no evidence that 
the law-maker wishes to bind otherwise than sub gravi ; 2. if 
the law is formulated in words expressing great obligation and 
strict precept ; in such words as v.g., prcecipimus sub grati, sub 
indignatione Dei, or in viriuti sanctte obedientice, ex tola potestate, 
omnino, totaliter, or like expressions. Words that simply order 
or direct, such as volumus, prcecipimus, and similar forms, are 
doubtful and do not impose a grave obligation ; 3. if a great 
penalty is added for the breaking of the law, such as excom- 
munication, suspension, or the like ; 4. if custom and the 
practice of the learned and the conscientious recognize the 
obligation to be grave, because custom is the best interpreter 
of the law. 

What, then, is the binding force of the Decrees of Baltimore 
concerning the liquor traffic, and how far do they bind in this 
diocese, or in any diocese, in which they are not explicitly 
embodied in the statutes ? 

The Decrees of a Provincial or National Council contain the 
most authentic and binding Church Law, which, next to the 
Canon Law and the Pontifical Constitutions, is the chief rule of 
the clergy in the country or province in which it is held. But 
all canonists admit that these decrees must be published by each 
bishop in his own diocese. Is a general promulgation sufficient, 
or must the decrees of a National or Provincial Council be 
explicitly embodied in the diocesan statutes to bind the subject 
of that diocese ? This seems to me to be an important question, 
what is the binding force of the Decrees of Baltimore ? It is 
well, perhaps, to talk freely on this matter, expecting and 
hoping, as I do, to be corrected if wrong. I have not found 
this question treated ex professo anywhere, except by a recent 
writer on ecclesiastical law, who says, in substance: "The 
decrees of the Baltimore Council that are purely disciplinary 
possess just that degree of binding force which the local laws 
or statutes of the several dioceses give to them. In these 
statutes the Council is decently referred to when its injunctions 
concur with the diocesan enactment. Two equally bad extremes 
are to be avoided with regard alike to our plenary and provin- 
cial councils, to wit, an exaggeration of their authority, reaching 
down to the very letter of the decrees, and a belittling of the 


obligations imposed thereby. The enforcement of the observance 
of these conciliar decrees belongs to the bishops in their respec- 
tive dioceses, and as the bishops may undoubtedly insist on the 
observance of some of those decrees, and neglect the enforcement 
of others, it may be tiuly said that the councils, though fer se 
and in adu primo binding, do not bind the clergy in actu secundo, 
nisi mediante actione episcopi. Of this obligation in aclu primo are 
to be understood the promulgations in synod of the plenary 
councils made in general terms, as : " Decrela omnia in Concilia 
Plenaria Bal. III. et in Concilia Provincial Neo-Eboracensi IV. lata, 
atque jampridem promulgates, nos iterum hac in synodo promulgamus 
et ab omnibus, quos special, fideliter servari jubemus. Ne vero horum 
conciliorum decreta ob ignorantiam facilius violenlur, volumus ut omnes 
nostri sacerdotes prcedicta decreta iypis e.\pressa prcs manibus habeanl 
scepiusque pervolvant." (Syn. Novarcen., V.) 

Such a 'general promulgation does not make every title of the 
Plenary and Provincial Councils binding on the conscience of 
the clergy in the same way that it is bound by our diocesan 
statutes. Ignorance of a statute of the diocese cannot be pleaded 
in excuse. Ignorance of a decree of the plenary or provincial 
council may be. The word "volumus" insinuates all this. There 
may be particular decrees of the council which, for all the clergy 
may know, a bishop would not consider it prudent to enforce 
in his diocese, just as there may be decisions of the Roman 
congregations which it would be wrong, because confusing, for 
individual clergymen to take it on themselves to observe without 
the assent of the ordinary. There can be no question that the 
decisions of the Sacred Congregations, per se, and aside from 
accidental conditions, are binding, and so, too, there can be no 
question of the binding force, per se, of the decrees of our 
ple'nary and provincial councils. To deny this would be to deny 
the legislative authority of the bishops "quos Spiritus Sanctus 
posuit," etc. (Acts, xx.) 

This assertion of the bishop's right to use his own discretion 
as to enforcing or neglecting to enforce particular decrees of 
plenary or provincial councils does not conflict with the commands 
of Trent. Sess. xxiv. c. 2 ; "Ibidem episcopi, qui nulli archiepiscopo 
subjiduntur ; aliquem vicinum metropolitanum simul eligant, in cujus 
synodo provinciali cum aliis interesse debeant, et quce ibi ordinaia 
fuerint observtnt ac obstrvari faciant." Bishops are not at liberty 
to ignore the decrees of plenary or provincial councils. This 


text from Trent shows that they are bound by them, and bound 
also to enforce them. Nevertheless, in practical application, the 
principle must be remembered that, where it would be injurious 
to a community to enforce a particular law, then the law, without 
ceasing to exist or to be ptr se, and in aciu primo, binding, ceases 
to be obligatory in that particular place ; and this by the will, 
expressed or reasonably presumed, of the legislative authority. 
Laws are designed not for the injury, but for the benefit of 
the community. 

If this view be correct, then the exact binding force of the 
decrees of Baltimore is fixed by the promulgation of the Bishop, 
or by their incorporation in the diocesan statutes. 

I can find no strict command against liquor selling, even on 
Sundays, in our statutes. We read in our statutes (No 32.) that 
" priests should frequently exhort liquor sellers not to give drink 
to drunkards or minors, to keep their bars closed on the Lord's 
Day, and to induce the faithful to practise total abstinence." 
No. 47, speaking of the sanctification of Sunday, says "that the 
faithful are to be told that they should magnanimously avoid 
trafficking in liquor or frequenting places where liquor is sold on 
Sundays." Nor can I find any law, not even in the decrees of 
the Council of Baltimore, on this subject. The Council of Bal- 
timore says: "In view of the many and grave dangers and 
occasions of sin that beset the trade of intoxicating liquors, we 
solemnly admonish such of the faithful as may be engaged in 
this business, lawful though it be in itself, to choose, if they can. 
some more becoming way of making a living ; otherwise let them 
at least not sell liquor on Sundays, nor to minors, nor to such 
as they foresee will abuse it." (Decree No. 263.) 

Decree No. 113 says: "Among the causes that lead to the 
desecration of the Lord's Day and other violations of divine as 
well as human laws, the practice of selling liquor on Sundays is 
certainly the chief. Therefore let pastors labor actively and use 
exhortations and entreaties, even threats and punishments when 
necessary, to root out this great evil." Here, indeed, is expressed 
a counsel, nay, even a strong displeasure, against desecrating the 
Sunday, especially by selling liquor on the Lord's Day, or selling 
it at all to minors ; but the absolute will of the Fathers of Bal- 
timore to bind strictly in conscience is not expressed ; in other 
words, there is no law in the Council of Baltimore against selling 
liquor on Sundays or to minors. 


Our third question is : Did Jimes act against the law of nature 
in carrying on the liquor traffic as stated ? 

In answer to this question I will first observe that the law of 
nature forbids those things that are necessarily bad, mala in se, 
But to sell liquor is, in itself, just as lawful as to sell anything 
else, and certainly the selling is not necessarily bad, nor against 
the law of nature. Speaking on the general question of the use 
and abuse of liquor, we find Cardinal Manning saying; "Now, 
my dear friends, listen : I will go down to my grave without tasting 
intoxicating liquor?, but I repeat distinctly that any man who 
should say that the use of wine or any other like thing is sinful, 
when it does not lead to drunkenness, that man is a heretic, con- 
demned by the Catholic Church. With that man I will never work." 

The plain inference from Cardinal Manning's words is that the 
use of liquor in moderation is lawful, and we know that such 
has always been the teaching of the Church. It follows that 
what it is lawful to use, it must be lawful to sell. It is of 
the first importance that we should distinctly apprehend the 
precise object of abstinence, as taught by the Church. There is 
no general law of the Church either enforcing or forbidding total 
abstinence. To those for whom the use of wine or other liquors 
is not an occasion of sin, an appeal is made, on the ground of 
charity and zeal for the good of their neighbors, and that their 
weaker brethren may have the benefit of their example and en- 
couragement, to forego the use of what is, in itself, perfect'y law- 
ful to be used. It is also recommended to practice total absti- 
nence as a means of Christian mortification. 

But we should distinctly remember that there is no sin in taking 
a glass of wine or spirits, or in the habitual, moderate use of 
such liquors ; and hence, that we have no right to condemn a 
practice which is not forbidden either by divine or human law. 
The Church in her teaching discountenances the Manichean idea 
that wine and other intoxicating drinks are the productions of 
an evil principle, and has never tolerated that those who abstain 
should pass censure on those who use their liberty. The question, 
therefore, of temperance and total abstinence is not a question of 
bad and good, but, if I may so speak, of good and better. It 
is good to exercise our privilege and to partake of liquor as 
far as right reason shall indicate ; it is better, if one, led by God's 
grace, gives up his privilege, and that he may make himself more 
pleasing in God's sight, abstains entirely from its use. From 


these considerations it seems clear that, as the use of liquor is 
not unlawful, the sale of liquor in se cannot be unlawful, and, 
therefore, that James did not sin against the law of nature in 
carrying on the liquor business as stated, because he did nothing 
that was necessarily bad in itself. The positive laws which he vio- 
lated were not of grave obligation, strictly binding in conscience ; 
they were simply civil laws of a penal character, binding in 
conscience only so far as the payment of their penalties were 
concerned after sentence was imposed. It is only the abuse, 
not the use, of liquor which the Church condemns. The case 
does not state that James sold liquor to those whom he foresaw 
would abuse it, which of course he could not do, except for a 
grave reason, without becoming a formal co-operator in the 
sin of the drunkard. 

We now come to our fourth and last question. Which of the 
ttwo confessors acted with the greater wisdom and propriety ? 

The answer to this question turns upon another. . . Did 
Father Paul or Father Thomas distinguish more correctly 
and dearly between the law's exhortation and its strict com- 
mands ? Every confessor's duty is to make this distinction. 
Non est imponenda obligatio, nisi de ea certo comtat. He is sup- 
posed to know and to observe the line between mere exhortation 
and strict precept. There have at all times been current a 
number of heretical views on temperance. There is in our day 
a large amount of .extravagant talk on this subject, such as 
might owe its inspiration to the Manicheans. There is, there- 
fore, danger lest we adopt the same habit of wild and 
unconsidered speech, even if we do not hold the same ideas. 
These heretical views seemed to have affected Father Thomas's 
action, for he held that intoxicating drink is intrinsically bad, 
and that total abstinence is enjoined on all in this country. 
The abstinence that Father Thomas desired to impose seems to 
have been that which is called by St. Bernard " heretical 
abstinence." Speaking of those who hold the doctrine that the 
use of intoxicating drink is forbidden by the law of nature, St. 
Bernard says that they are heretics, not because they abstain 
but because they abstain heretical ly. Thus Father Thomas was 
betrayed into an extreme opinion of James's conduct that was 
neither justified by the teachings of the Church, nor counte- 
nanced by the Bishops in their counsels concerning temperance. 
He certainly failed to discriminate between the option left by 


exhortatation and the binding force of strict precept. He ought 
to have remembered that the power to decide what methods are 
lawful and prudent, to suppress intemperance throughout a 
country, belongs to the bishops, whom the Holy Ghost has 
appointed to rule and govern His Church. 

As regards the Church's action in our day, touching the 
subject of total abstinence, the present Pope, Leo XIII., has 
issued a letter to the temperance societies of America, encour- 
aging them in their efforts to combat and suppress intemperance. 
The Third Council of Baltimore, in the Pastoral letter, not 
only calls upon pastors to exhort their people to the observance 
of the Sunday laws, but "utters a special condemnation against 
the practice of selling beer or other liquor on Sunday, or of 
frequenting places where they are sold ;" and it " invokes a 
blessing on the cause of temperance and on all who are 
laboring for its advancement in a true Christian Spirit." 
Speaking of Catholic societies, it uses this language: "Then 
there are associations for the checking of immorality, prominent 
among which are our Catholic temperance societies. These 
should be encouraged and aided by all who deplore the 
scandal given and the spiritual ruin wrought by intemperance/' 
And, referring back to the prelates of the Second Plenary Council 
of Baltimore, the Third Council says : " No wonder that they 
gave a special approval to the zeal of those who, the better to 
avoid excess, or in order to give good example, pledge them- 
selves to total abstinance." 

The distinction is there plainly drawn in accordance with the 
uniform teachings and traditions of the Catholic Church. The 
zeal of those who pledge themselves to total abstinence from 
Christian motives is commended, but that is far from condemn- 
ing those who exercise their liberty and use liquors in modera- 
tion. Of course those who cannot drink liquors in moderation 
should not drink them at all. 

It is acknowledged on all hands that the evils of intemperance 
in the present day are gigantic and demand all our efforts to 
meet them. Cardinal Manning, speaking on this topic, says : 
" I feel that temperance and total abstinence ought to be 
familiar thoughts in the minds even of those who have never 
in all their lives been tempted to excess. And I cannot but 
feel that the almost contemptuous attitude assumed by so many 
Catholics towards teetolalism, shows a wilful blindness to the 


evils resulting from drink, or a want of the love of souls." 
But, after all his exhortations to total abstinence, Cardinal 
Manning is careful to add a warning like this : "I say this, 

not as a precept, but as a counsel Let those who use 

these things in moderation praise, as becometh Christians, the 
spirit of penance, which prompts others to abstain from them 
altogether ; and, on the other hand, let not those who abstain 
from them, dare to censure those who use them without excess. " 
This has been the teaching of the Fathers of the Church 
through all the ages. 

Father Thomas's treatment of his penitent, James, was not 
in accordance with that teaching. He undertook, by refusing 
his penitent absolution, to drive him out of a business which 
the Fathers of Baltimore . . . while advising men to seek more 
honorable ways of living . . . declare to be lawful in itself. 
Herein he showed more zeal than knowledge. A confessor must 
be careful not to impose counsels as precepts. It is, no doubt, 
more perfect to abstain altogether from the use or sale of 
liquor, but we are not obliged to do the more perfect thing, 
but simply to do right ; nor is there any obligation to follow 
the counsels of the law, though its precepts we are bound faithfully 
to obey. Moreover, the conduct of Father Thomas was calculated 
to make the sacrament odious, by imposing on his penitent 
exhortations and counsels, as if they were strict commands of 
obligation, and by denying the sacraments to those to whom 
the law of the Church does not deny them. The penitent has, 
at all times, a strong claim 'on the confessor to prevent even 
his worldly loss, and that the confessor shall not place burdens 
or obligations upon him which are not certain. 

For these reasons, I answer that Father Paul acted with the 
greater wisdom and propriety. My reading on this question 
leads me to the conclusion that the decrees of Baltimore and 
the civil laws do not bind strictly in conscience on this matter, 
and that, undoubtedly, total abstinence is not enjoined on all 
in this country, and therefore that Father Paul put the right 
and Father Thomas the wrong interpretation upon the laws. 

Father Paul's views were not at all inconsistent with a full 
appreciation of the dangers of intemperance. We may well 
assume that he reasoned with himself thus : "I am, I trust, 
fully awake to the dangers of alcohol, to the harm which it 
has done in the past and which it continues to do in the 


present. If any one shall choose to find in my action in 
absolving James, in the circumstances as presented to me, a 
warrant for the heedless and indiscriminate use of alcoholic 
stimulants, the responsibility must rest with him." 

The Catholic Church has always taught broadly that it is 
lawful to use all things that God has made, in all their mani- 
fold combinations, always provided that we use them in compli- 
ance with His laws. "Drunkenness is not the sin of drink, 
but of the drunkard." Nevertheless, we find that the Church in 
all her utterances, and the Holy Scriptures on every page, 
surround wine with emphatic and fearful warnings. We find in 
the Word of God all the temptations and perils of fermented 
drink set forth as clearly as was the fateful writing on the 
wall ; the constantly besetting tendency to its abuse, the subtle 
power of its fascinations, the almost irresistible spell which it 
exercises, and the strength and shame of the bondage in which 
it holds the minds and souls of men, whether in the humblest 
or the highest stations, ... all these are set before us in the Holy 
Scriptures. And yet, to affirm that the use of liquors is unlawful 
is a heresy. To affirm it, is to contradict all the teachings of 
both the Old and the New Testaments, and the immemorial 
traditions of the Catholic Church. Our one defence against the 
contagion of false maxims and principles in regard to temperance, 
is to sit ever at the Church's feet. If we listen to her voice, 
and make her utterance the one test and measure by which to 
temper our zeal and guide our course in promoting temperance 
and rooting out drunkenness, our action is sure to be safe, alike 
in the pulpit and the confessional. 


"Who hath woe? whose father hath woe? who hath conten- 
tions? who fall into pits? who hath wounds without cause? 
who hath redness of eyes ? Surely they that pass their time in 
wine and study to drink off their cups. Look not upon the 
wine when it is yellow, when the color thereof shineth in the 
glass. It goeth in pleasantly ; but in the end it will bite like 
a snake, and will spread abroad poison like a basilisk." Prov. 
xxiii. 29. 



(Written for The Pastor.) 

This question having recently been presented to the writer, 
quite a good deal of interesting and to him new theological 
information was the result of his investigations. The question 
having come from a fellow-clergyman, suspicion was naturally 
aroused that the ordinary data of the books of seminary days 
were not the means of arriving at the answer. For, according 
to the theology of those days, one would be prompted to 
answer with Kenrick or Konings, "That for a Catholic it 
would be impossible to hold a judicial position were he denied 
such right ; that it was plainly evident that a Catholic magistrate 
could conscientiously pronounce such a sentence in a case where 
a Catholic legally demanded it." 

Even according to later reading, answer may be made in the 
same strain substantially, with Father Sabetti, S. J., that at least 
a decision in the affirmative solidly probable mu-t be given to 
the question, ' whether in our country a Catholic judge may 
pronounce a sentence of divorce when it is demanded under 
the civil laws.' The reason that may be alleged is that the 
judge so acting is at most only guilty of a material co-opera- 
tion ; and this, for a serious reason, which is the case in this 
supposition, would be lawful. And with Father Sabetti, too, 
this course would be further strengthened by an a fortiori opinion 
of Kenrick, that it is lawful to thus pronounce a sentence, since 
only a civil effect is intended by those soliciting the divorce. 
(Cf. Kenrick, Tract. 8, n. 114.) 

But these opinions of seminary days, even strengthened as they 
were by such theologians of later reading as Konings, Sabetti, 
Marc, etc., must be somewhat modified by reason of a letter of 
the Holy See to the Belgian Government,. (THE PASTOR, VOL. 
V., p. 190), and two decisions of the Sacred Penitentiary. No 
discouragement need dishearten a novice in changing his opinion, 
so well foqnded, when he is told that such a distinguished 
theologian as Father Lehmkuhl has done likewise in the last 
or fourth edition of his great Moral Theology. In a note to 
Paragraph No. 701 of the second volume, this question is raised 
and placed in its strongest form, viz.: "Whether the said judge, 

Cl VII. DIVORCE. 1 75 

constrained by the necessity of resigning his position did he act 
otherwise, would be compelled to refrain from pronouncing such 
sentence of divorce " ? The great theologian is more guarded 
and more qualified in wording his answer, than is manifested 
by the theologians already mentioned. For he replies, that the 
' pronouncement of such sentence depends upon the manner in 
which he acts and pronounces it. Father Lehmkuhl then 
proceeds to reason out his position in the followng word?, viz. : 
"Si enim ita pronuntiare potest et pronuntiat, ut clare pateat 
idque litigantibus innotescat, se nullatenus tangere neque tangere 
velle ipsum vinculum seu contractum, sed solam civilium juriurri 
protectionem vel cessationem secundum leges quoad reliqua non 
iniquas se determinare : Non negaverim id ex adeo gravi causa 
judici licere. Videlicet tune prouuntiat, in hisce circumstantiis 
hoc et illud matrimonium a civili auctoritate tamquam non 
existens considerari, et legalem impuniiatem adulterandi non licentiam 
pronuntiat atque contribuit. Quod a legibus statui, iniquum 
quidem est et malorum gravium causa : quse tamen quum 
impediri a judice nequeant, permitti ab eo posse dixerim. Si 
quando autem ejusmodi leges ex odio Ecclesiae feruntur et 
sustinentur, atque illud odium flagrans eflertur, quaelibet 
co-operatio et applicatio illicita evadere potest. Ceterum in dubio, 
qualis co-operatio licita sit vel illicita, S. Sedis est statuere : quae, 
sicut res sint in Galla, divortii sententiam non licere dixit (S. 
O. 27 Maji, 1886), ad Belgium earn decisionem extendi negavit. 
Generalis lex dicitur preparari. " 

In such words and by the above reasoning, it is evident that 
the answer formerly given to the question, ' may a Catholic judge 
pronounce a sentence of divorce ? ' must be considerably qualified, 
if not radically changed. Considerably qualified, if not radically 
changed, for the reason that another theologian, of by no means 
inferior standing, goes even a step further than Father Lehmkuhl. 
The writer refers to Father Bucceroni, the successor of Father 
Ballerini to the chair of moral theology at the Roman College. 
This learned professor last year prepared a supplement to 
Ballerini's-Gury, which is known by the title, "Enchiridion 
Morale el Supplementum Compendia Theologies Moralis Gury-Ballerini, " 
etc. This volume contains a selection of the decisions of the 
Holy See, that may prove useful to professors and confessors. 
The work is truly a supplement : it refers to the numbers of 
Gury-Ballerini, and gives under each number the decisicns 


relative to the questions treated therein. At the end of the 
volume are four dissertations, one of which treats the question 
of sentence of divorce pronounced by a lay judge. Father 
Bucceroni does not even attempt to prove that this sentence is 
illicit : Since according to the decisions of the S. Penitentiary 
and S. Inquisition, (which appeared in THE PASTOR last year,) he. 
regards it as already settled beyond doubt. " Sententiam hanc illici- 
tam prorsus esse pitet ex pluribus de hac re decisionibus." The author 
goes even further, and asks if the matter be intrinsically evil, 
and replies affirmatively, and finds the proof of this answer in a 
decision of the S. Inquisition which declares this sentence 
" defleclam a principiis juris naturalis et repugnans juri divino." 
But his principal argument, the one which he makes the very 
foundation of his Dissertation, and which we meet therein again 
and again under different forms, and upon which the author 
ceaselessly insists, is as follows : The law of divorce is an intrinsi- 
cally evil law, contrary to the natural and divine laws. Therefore, 
it is not permissible to render a sentence that may conform to 
it, because that would be "judicare secundum injustitiam et contra 
jus naturale et dwinum." The statement of the theologians of 
our seminary days, and of some since those days, viz. : that the 
judge, in pronouncing a decree of divorce, limits himself to 
simply declaring, in a particular case, what the law lays down, 
Father Bucceroni summarily disposes of by answering that such 
declaration on the part of the judge is " authtntica et auiioritativa," 
that it is the judge himself that renders practicable, if not 
possible, the injustice of the law, as well as authorizes the 
injustice of divorce ; or, in his own words, " Intrinsece autem 
malum est auctoritative et juridice declarare, haud quidem specula- 
tive, sed omnino practice, justum esse quod in se est injustum." 
Nor will it avail against the cogency and closeness of Father 
Bucceroni's reasoning to fall back on that familiar subterfuge, 
that the pronouncement of the sentence of divorce is only a 
material co-operation in the culpable consequences, which de- 
pend solely upon the bad will of the parties asking the 
divorce ; for the learned theologian declares it to be a formal 
co-operation and efficacious by its very nature. Formal, . . . 
"quia, tola quanta est, tendit in faciendam facultatem ex parte 
legis convolandi ad alias nuptias ; " efficacious, ..." quia prae- 
dicta nubendi facultas ex parte legis, in casu particulari et in 
determinata persona, nonnisi sententiae judicis effecta est." 


Nor will it better the case to say with Kenrick, and quoted 
approvingly by Konings and Sabbetti, that the judge may 
perhaps only take cognizance of the contract and its civil effects; 
for the learned professor replies, that, if the judge has subjec- 
tively this intention, it is recalled when contradicted by his 
own acts, that is- to say, by pronouncing the decree of divorce 
which attacks the mxtrimonial bond ; " Ilia subjectiva abstractio 
et intentio ipsa objediv.i actione retractatur, ilia nempe pronun- 
tiatione divortii." For, moreover, this sentence being only the 
application of the law, the intrinsic and immediate object of the 
sentence is the same as the intrinsic and immediate object of 
the law, and is consequently the dissolution of the matrimo- 
nial bond, which conclusion is ably and conclusively argued in 
these words of Father Bucceroni : " Hujusmodi instantia et 
assertio. . . statuit objectum sententias esse civilium effectum et 
jurium denegationem . . Falsa omnino est ; et enim legisla- 
tores legem divortii ferentes, licet impii viri, non sunt tamen tarn 
insipientes ut matrimonium, quod illorum civilium jurium fun- 
damentum est, intactum relinquentes, jura tamen ex illo dima- 
nantia denegent ; sed ipsum matrimonium dissolventes, potestate 
civiliter facta convolandi ad alias nuptias, protectionem legis 
comequenter denegant quoad civilia jura. Objectum intrinsecum, 
immediatum, illius legis est ipsum matrimonii vinculum, unde 
etiam suum nomen sortitur et lex divortii appellatur. Idem 
est ergo objectum sententiag judicis, cum judicis sit non condere 
legem, sed secundum legem scriptam, earn particulaii casui 
applicando, judicium pronuntiare." 

In the light of all this, a decisive conclusion seems inevitable 
against the permissibility of a Catholic judge pronouncing a 
sentence of divorce in our civil courts. 

Father Lemkuhl allows some little ground for at least reason- 
able doubt in the matter, and even at the date of his last 
edition leaves the question, in a restricted sense, still open, but 
says that a general law is about to be prepared. Are Father 
Bucceroni's conclusions, written as they have been some short 
time later than Father Lemkuhl's now modified views, the 
advanced heralds of this general law about to be sent out by 
the Holy See? If so, are his conclusions absolutely decisive? 
This is not known. What is known, though, is this, that the 
conclusions of Father Bucceroni are of the weightiest character. 

The simple fact that last year at Rome, with the Imprimatur 


of the Master of the Sacred Palace, the learned professor of the 
Roman College published a treatise containing in a most formal 
and unmistakable manner a doctrine so opposed to all hitherto- 
received opinions, is sufficient to warrant the assertion that some 
theologians have since modified their opinions, and others have 
even presented this teaching of Father Bucceroni as definitively 
accepted and confirmed. With the editor of the Nouvdle Revue 
Theofagique, then, must it be said that, if the question has been 
formally decided in the sense that is evidently claimed by these, 
it seems that Father Bucceroni would certainly be aware of 
it, and this it is that gives weight to his decision, that a 
Catholic is not permitted to pronounce a decree of divorce. With 
the same editor all are awaiting and strongly desiring a formal 
decision that will command universal assent. Meanwhile it is no 
longer safe, if even permissibl to hold the contrary opinion. 


[It is a pity to have to spend time and ink on this 
question. We know that there is now, and has been since 
November, 1886, an Instruction from the Holy Office in the hands 
of every bishop in France, directing them to let the Catholic 
judges retain their posts and administer the odious law. But, 
for satisfactory reasons, the precise terms of this Instruction are 
not made public. 

Father Tuohy makes the very common mistake of supposing that 
persons in Rome can gain information of all that passes in the 
Congregations. They more generally learn it from foreign countries. 

As the November Instruction cannot be published, at least for 
the present, we shall at the earliest opportunity reply to the 
theological difficulties raised by F. Bucceroni and one or two 
others. Lehmkuhl has not changed his teaching, nor, for that 
matter, modified it. Ed.} 

"Si quem impcenitentem cogitur (sacerdos) a se dimittere, 
praesertim aliis praesentibus, externas cceremonias, manus scilicet 
impositionis sen elevationis, et signi crucis etiam tune debet 
adhibere, ne harum cceremoniarum omissio sit impcenitentis animi 
proditio, et negatae absolutionis indicium." Catalani Rituale 
Romanum, Tom. I., Tit. III., c. 2, n. 20. 



Wealthy families occasionally erect mausoleums in the form 
of veritable chapels upon the family plot in public cemeteries. 
In these chapels Mass is sometimes said wiih the ordinary's 
permission. There is also in those cemeteries the regular public 
mortuary chapel, as at Calvary. A doubt occurred as to whether 
these private chapels should all be blessed. Only the mortuary 
chapel can be ; the private or family chapels, not. 

Emus et Rmus D. Cardinalis Alphonsus Capecelatro, hodiernus 
Archiepiscopus Capuanus, exponens huic Sanctse Apostolica3 Sedi 
usum in sibi credita archidicecesi invectum erigendi in publico 
coemeterio, ubi publicum oratorium habetur, particularia seorsim 
sacella penes privata familiarum sepulcra, in quibus sacellis 
permittitur aliquando Miss-ae celebratio, huic Sacrorum Rituum 
Congregation! insequentia dubia circa eorumdem sacellorum 
benedictionem pro opportuna resolutione subjecit, nimirum : 

I. An principale ccemeterii publici oratorium per propriam 
benedictionem benedicendum sit ? 

II. An private sedicula; seu sacella in privatorum sepulcris 
benedicenda sint ? 

Et sacra eadem Congregatio, ad relationem infrascripti Sec- 
retarii, exquisitoque voto alterius ex apostolicarum caeremoniarum 
magistris, re mature perpensa, ita propositis dubiis rescribendum 

Ad I. Affirmative, tanqiiam publicum oratorium. 

Ad II. Negative. 

Atque rescripsit die 31 Januarii 1887. 



Rmus Dnus Romanus Lovera, hodiernus Episccpus Emeriten. 
in ditione de Venezuela, insequentia dubia pro opportuna solu- 
tione sacrae Rituum Congregationi demississime subjecit, nimirum: 

I. An Feria VI post octavam Ascensionis, in qua fit officium 
novem lectionum uti infra octavam Ascensionis, quse tamen 
feria est libera, fieri possit officium votivum Passionis ? 

II. In ecclesiis parochialibus, ubi non adest chori obligatio, 
tempore quadragesimali, in Festo S. Joseph vel aliorum sanctorum, 


possunt cantari Vesperae post comestionem, seu post meridiem, 
ad populi devotionem fovendam ? 

III. Commemoratio de Cruce, quse dicitur tempore paschali 
(loco suffragiorum de Sanctis), potestne recitari quando fit offi- 
cium votivum de Passione ? 

IV. Num. sacerdos, Missam votivam lectam vel solemnem de 
Immaculata Beatae Mariae Virginis Conceptione celebraturus, re- 
spondentem officio ejusdem votivo, quod cum cseteris universal! 
ecclesiae concessum fuit, teneatur adhibere missam cujus Inlroitus 
Gaudens gaudeboj 3 

Et sacra eadem Congregatio, ad relationem infrascripti Secre- 
tarii exquisitoque voto alterius ex apostolicarum caeremoniarum 
magistris, omnibus mature perpensis, ita propositis dubiis re- 
scribendum censuit : 
Ad I. Negative. 
Ad II. Negative. 
Ad III. Negative. 

Ad IV. Affirmative ; attamen servata Rulrica Missis votivis 
per annum prceposita. 

Atque ita rescripsit die 29 Aprilis 1887. 

In his first query the petitioner evidently labored under a 
mistake. The Friday or feria VI after the octave of the Ascen- 
sion is not quite a dies libera. It ranks as a dies infra octa- 
vam. A special rubric inserted after the office of the octave of 
the Ascension in the Breviary reads : " Duobus sequentibus die- 
bus officium fit sicut infra octavam Ascensionis, etc. Et non 
dicuntur preces ad Primam et Completorium." The concession 
of July 5, 1883 (THE PASTOR, I. 342) permits us to substitute the 
votive offices only for feria'l offices : " Detur Indultum generate 

persolvendi officia votiva per annum loco officiorum ferialium." 

The office of the Friday after the octave of the Ascension is 
not de feria. 

With regard to the second query it is known that in the 
beginning the office was said only in choir. Persons who could 
not be present were bound to no office ; just as a layman now 
who cannot go to mass on Sunday, is not bound to read the 
"Prayers for Mass" out of his prayer book at home. In time, 
however, two distinct obligations came to be recognized, namely, 
that of being present in choir AND of reciting the divine office. 
Thenceforth exemption from one did not, eo ipso, exempt from 
the other. The monk or collegiate priest who was excused 


from choir, was supposed and bound to comply with that part 
of the duty of which he was capable, and recite the Canonical 
Hours as though he were present. 

The time of assembling for the recitation of the office was 
always considered a substantial part of the duty. This part the 
absentee was also bound to comply with. But as no great 
deordination could result from anticipating somewhat or postponing, 
in the case of one who recited the office in private, a trivial 
cause, but not mere whim would excuse. 

When in the course of time the recitation of the office became 
obligatory on the secular clergy, they were, fictione juris, absentees 
from choir. ( Their obligations in regard to the divine offices 
were determined by determining the obligations of the absentees. 
Unless excused by cause they were, therefore, bound not only to 
recite the canonical Hours, but to reciie them at or about the 
time they were being said in choir. 

It is not, therefore, quite true that we are free, as individuals, 
to postpone Vespers in Lent till the afternoon : a fortiori no 
priests are free to assemble, per modum chori, for the public 
recitation of Vespers at a time when, even in the most strictly 
private recitation thereof, a certain degree of deordination is in- 
volved. Hence the Negative of the Sacred Congregation. 

The third query was hardly necessary. In the rubric prefixed 
to the Ojficia Votiva per annum we read ; Habent (hasc officia) 
juxta rubricas, prout alia festa semid. novem lectionum, turn com- 

memorationes feriae et festi simplicis occurrentis, turn 

Adduntur commemorationes communes seu suffragia sanctorum, 
ut in Psalterio, si facienda sint, omissa commemoratione ejus, de quo 
fit officium votivum. The immediate object of the commemoratio 
de cruce is the Passion. Ant. Crucifixus surrexit a mor/uis, etc., 
Or emus. Deus qui pro nobis Filium tuum crucis patibulum subire 
voluisti) etc. 

To the fourth query the answer might have been, Serventur 
rubriccB. Under the heading MISS^E VOTIVE PER ANNUM in the 
Missal we find ; " Pro Sabbato: De Immaculata Conceptione B. 
Maria Virginis. Missa, Gaudens gaudebo, ut in festo die 8 Decem- 
bris. No alternative is allowed. If the prie:*t wishes to say a votive 
of the Blessed Virgin on Saturday in virtue of that decree of 
July 5, 1883, the mass should conform as far as possible to the 
office. On Saturday there can be no possible excuse for taking 
another mass. 



By a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, dated 
August 26, 1747, (supra, p. 121), sodalities of the Holy Rosary 
erected without permission of the Father General of the Domini- 
cans do not participate in the favors granted by the Holy See 
to the primary sodality in Rome. Bishops can canonically erect 
sodalities of the Holy Rosary. That is a different thing from 
endowing them with privileges. To gain the indulgences granted 
the parent sodality, all others must be aggregated thereto. 

Last July the religious Orders which originally established the 
sodalities of Mount Carmel, of the Blessed Trinity , and of the 
Seven Dolours, petitioned the Holy Father to extend the decree 
of 1747 so as to include these sodalities. His Holiness complied 
with the request, and the decree, page 125, was issued. 

Like the decree of 1747, it will be noticed that that of 1887 
does not directly prohibit the erection of the sodalities named, 
but only denies them any claim to the indulgences. A right 
to the indulgences must be derived through the arch-confraternity, 
and is obtained only when through aggregation or incorporation 
the new sodality is made one with the original. 

There exists no general concession of indulgences for sodalities, 
as such. A sodality may be formed to honor the Holy Face, 
for instance, or the Five Wounds, or in honor of our Lady's 
Assumption, or of any mystery or saint. Such a sodality erected 
with permission of the bishop is canonically erected, (supra [45O]. 

But whether it adopt a new name, or the name and rules 
of a sodality previously existing, the members of the new 
sodality are entitled to no special privileges or indulgences. 
Thus a sodality of Our Lady of Mount Carmel may be erected, 
and canonically erected, in his church by Father X. But its 
members would not be entitled to the indulgences or privileges 
granted to the Sodality cf Mount Carmel. So far as these 
indulgences go, only one sodality is known, that of the 
Carmelites in Rome. But that sodality is empowered to aggregate 
others to itself, so as to make them one with it, and so participators 
with it in privileges and indulgences. 

The decree of 1747 and the decree of last July merely 
declared what was the original intention of the Holy See when 
granting certain sodalities indulgences. The grant was not, in 
general, for all sodalities of such a name or title, but specifically 
for a certain, existing, known, sodality. 






Bealissime Pater : 

Inter plurimas quae vigent piae Sodalitates in honorem B. 
Mariae Virginis institute, ea quoque adnumeranda est quae titulo 
gaudet ejusdem B. Mariae Virginis a Salute nuncupate, et S. 
Joseph! ejusdem Sponsi, nee non S. Camilli de Lellis Confess- 
oris. Haec suam repetit originem a Clericis Regularibus Infirmis 
ministrantibus, qui earn primitus erexerunt in Ecclesia principe 
sui Ordinis S. Mariae Magdalenae pcenitenti in hac alma Urbe 
dicata, quam deinde in reliquis etiam propriis Ecclesiis propa- 
garunt. Progressu temporis supradicta Sodalitas titulum quoque 
Archisodalitatis assequuta est cum facultate alias sibi similes 
Sodalitates aggregandi eisque communicandi Indulgentias, quibus 
a Romanis Pontificibus ditata est. Quamvis autem praefatum 
jus aggregandi nonnisi uni supremo Moderator! Archiso- 
dalitatis tributum sit, qui ipsemet est Praepositus generalis 
Ordinis Clericorum Infirmis Ministrantium, attamen cum piae- 
dictarum Sodalitatum erectio ipsis etiam competat speciali Apos- 
tolico ludulto erigendi Sodalitates cum Indulgentiis, quibus in 
Urbe perfruuntur respectivae Archiconfraternitates, supramemoratam 
quoque Sodalitatem erigant absque ulla exhibita petitione aggre- 
gationis supremo Sodalitatis Moderatori. 

Id vero uti experientia comprobat in ejusdem Sodalitatis bo- 
num minime vergit. In his siquidem Sodalitatibus tali modo 
erectis, quae nullo inter se vinculo conjunguntur cum Sodalita- 
*e primaria, quae ab Apostolica Sede uti centrum aliarum fuit 
constituta, paulatim ea deficit unitas directionis piorumque 
usuum uniformitas, quae maxime confert ad incrementum ho- 
noris et devotionis erga Bmam Virginem, nee non majoris spiri- 
tualis boni ipsorum Sodalium. Haec secum reputans Joachim 
Ferrini hodiernus Vicarius generalis CC. RR. Infirmis Minis- 
trantium, supplices admovet preces Sanctitati Vestrae, quatenus 
benigne decernere dignetur, ut in posterum Sodalitates sub titulo 
B. M. Virginis a Salute ac S. Joseph Ejus Sponsi et S. Camilli 
de Lellis Confessoris canonice erectas per Revrr.orum Ordinari- 


orum Decretum extra Ecclesias Ministrantium Infirmfs, frui 
nullimode posse Indulgentiis, gratiis et privilegiis a Romanis 
Pontificibus Archisodalitati Romae existent! in praefata Ecclesia 
concessis, nisi fuerint eidem Archisodalitati, praevio Revroorum 
pariter Ordinariorum consensu, aggregate per patentes literas ab 
eodem Praefecto general! eorumdem CC. RR. Ministrantium 
Infirmis expediendas. 
Et Deus etc. 

Ex Auditntia SSmi diet 17 Novembris 1887. 
SSmus D. N. Leo Papa XIII benigne annuit pro gratia juxta 
preces, servatis de jure servandis. Praesenti in perpetuum valituro 
absque ulla Brevis expeditione. Contraiiis non obstantibus qui- 
buscumque. Datum ex Secretaria S. Congnis Indulg. SS. et 
Reliq. die 19 Nov. 1887. 



Beatissime Paler : 

Antonius M. Anderledy, Praepositus Generalis Soc. Jesn, ad 
pedes S. V. provolutus demisse exponit, olim Congregationes 
B. Mariae Virg. et Bonae Mortis, ut in ecclesiis Societatis ortum 
habuerunt ita, etsi ab aliis erigerentur, Indulgentias a Sede 
Apostolica illis concessas consequi non potuisse, nisi a Praeposito 
Generali Soc. Jesu, cui ad id ampla /acultas a pluribus Romanis 
Pontificibus concessa et saepius confirmata est, Primariis Congre- 
gationibus ejusdem tituli in Collegio Romano, sive in Ecclesia 
SSmi Nominis Jesu canonice erectis aggregarentur. Ex qua 
quidem benigna S. Sedis dispositione, inter alias, haec imprimis 
utilitas promanabat, quod omnes illae Congregationes, etsi per 
totum Orbem erant diffusae, iisdem tamen regerentur legibus 
et usibus, et communi quodam vinculo colligatae, sancta inter 
se semulatione ad bona quaeque opera stimulos sibi injiceient, 
atque plurimos ad Dei gloriam et animarum salutem proferrent 
ubique fructus insignes. 


Verum ab aliquo tempore dictae Congregationes B. Marise 
Virg. et Bonge Mortis ab aliis quoque non (ut jam 
pridem in usu fuerat) eriguntur, verum etiam Indulgentiis ab 
hac S. Sede ipsis concessis ditantur, ita ut nullatenus ad 
Primarias illas Congregationes Romanas aggregentur, sed singulae 
earum per Orbem diffusae, nullo vinculo inter se, nee cum ullo 
communi centro conjunctae remaneant. 

Quare piaedictus Orator enixe et humiliter rogat, ut S. V., si 
ita expedire ad majorem earum Congrecationum profectum vide- 
atur, benigne statuat, Congregationes B. M. Virginis et Bonae 
Mortis, etsi ab aliis sint erectas, nihilominus Indulgentias eis a 
Romanis Pontificibus concessas non posse consequi in posterum, 
nisi, ut jam pridem usus ferebat, a Societatis Jesu Praeposito 
Generali, obtento utique ordinarii loci consensu, ad Primarias 
Congregationes Romanas fuerint aggregatae. 

Et Deus, etc. 

SSmus. Dnus Noster Leo Papa XIII. in audientia habita die 
17 Septembris ab infrascripto Secretario S. Congregationis Indul- 
gentiis sacrisque Reliquiis praepositag, benigne annuit pro gratia 
juxta preces, servatis de jure servandis. Piaesenti in perpetuum 
valituro absque ulla Brevis expeditione. Contrariis ncn obstanti- 
bus quibuscumque. Datum ex Secretaria S. Congnis Indulgent. 
et SS. Reliq. die 17 Septembris 1887. 

Pro Rmo. Dno. Card. Fr. THOMA M. ZIGLIARA, Pro-/. 



quo concedbntur indulgences redtantibus parvum B. V. M. offiaum 

Ex Audientia SSmi did 16 Navembris 1887. 
Pia et laudabilis jamdiu viget consuetude, longo saeculorum 
decursu numquam interrupta, apud Christifideles speciali cultu 
prosequendi Beatissimam Virginem Mariam devota recitatione 
parvi Officii, quod in honorem ejusdem Virginis extat in 
Breviario Romano a S. Pio V. recognito et approbate. Ad 
quam praedicti Officii lectionem et usum, ut majus adderet 
incitamentum idem sanctus Pontifex aliquas Indulgentias, nedum 
iis qui illud persolvere tenebantur diebus in Rubrica praefinitis, 


sed et ceteris Christifidelibus, quibus ex propria devotione mos 
erat ipsum recitandi, clementer elargitus est. Quo vero ista 
tam salutaris Christiano populo consuetude recitandi Mariales 
laudes majus accipiat incrementum, hac prsesertim aetate, qua 
ad Deiparam Virginem fidenter confugiendum est, ne tot, quibus 
undique premimur, aerumnis obruamur, SSmo Domino Nostro 
supplices exhibitae sunt preces, quatenus usum recitandi parvum 
Officium Beatae Marias Virginus ditiori Indulgentiarum thesauro 
promovere dignaretur. Has porro preces idem bSmus peraman- 
ter excipiens valdeque exoptans, appropinquante jam anno 
quinquagesimo, a quo Sacrum primum litavit, erga sanctissimam 
Dei Genitricem suae veneraiiones gratique animi novum edere 
testimonium, et in Christifidelibus magis fovere studium ac 
pietatem, ut memorato laudem praeconio pergant eidem divinae 
Matri cultum exhibere et honorem, Indulgentias, uti sequitur, 
benigne concessit ; nempe i. Plenariam, lucrandam quolibet anni 
mense, die uniuscujusque arbitrio eligendo, ab omnibus ulriusque 
sexus Christifidelibus, qui mense integro quotidie totum parvum 
OfBcium B. Marias Virginis, idest Matutinum, quod uno tantum 
constat nocturno diei currentis cum reliquis horis usque ad 
Completorium inclusive, devote recitaverint, dummodo praefato die 
vere, confessi ad sacram Synaxim accesserint, piasque 
ad Deum preces aliquo temporis spatio ad mentem Sanctitatis 
Suae effuderint: 2. Stptem armor um totidemque quadragenarum, 
semel in die acquirendam ab iis Christifidelibus, qui piaefatum 
parvum Officium devote pariter et corde saltern contrito persol- 
verint : 3. Ttrctntum demum dierum, ab iis similiter semel in die 
lucrandam, qui Matutinum tantum, uti supra, cum Laudibus 
devote ac corde item contrito recitaverint. 

Quas omnes Indulgentias eadem Sanctitas Sua animabus quo- 
que Christifidelium in Purgatoiio detentis fore applicabiles benigne 
declaravit. Praesertim in ptrpttnum valituro absque ulla Brevis 
expeditione. Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis Sacrisque 
Reliquiis praepositae die 17 Novembris 1887. 


"When a rich man is shaken, he is kept up by his friends: 
but when a poor man is fallen down, he is thrust away even 
by his acquaintance." Eccles. xiii. 25. 



For the last thirty years, and especially since 1862. when certain 
propositions taken from the works of Ubaghs were condemned, the 
condemnation of Rosmini's philosophy seemed to most of those 
who take any interest in these subjects only a matter of time. 
In the Vatican Council Cardinal Joachim Pecci, our present glorious 
supreme Pontiff, was one among others who presented a Postulaium 
to the following effect: 

The undersigned Cardinal Bishops, in order not to prolong 
discussion, propose for condemnation only that form of Ontologism 
which is in open contradiction with the Catholic faith, and is the 
basis of many of the errors now widely spread : it is summed 
up in the proposition : Naturalis est homini cognitio Dei directa 
et immediala : 

It does not seem expedient for the Vatican Council to be 
entirely silent in regard to Ontologism. From the silence of the 
Council the Ontologists would be emboldened to resume their 
activity, to renew their contentions, to disregard the decisions of 
the Sacred Congregation, to create revolt and annoyances for 
the Holy See. For, inasmuch' as the Holy Office decreed, Sept. 
1 8, 1 86 r, that the proposition in question cannot be taught 
without danger, and many bishops have emphatically denounced 
Ontologism, the faithful seem to look for its condemnation ; they 
would wonder why bishops were called here from all parts of the 
globe to condemn Pantheism, Rationalism, and other errors, from 
which they are capible of guarding themselves; while the errors 
which lead up to all these monstrosities were passed over. Wherefore 
we propose for .condemnation the following proposition : Naturalis 
est homini cognitio Dei immediata et directa. 

Barely a glance at the proposition will be sufficient to see 
that it is directly opposed to that article of our faith whereby 
we believe that the intuitive vision of God which the blessed 
enjoy is supernatural. For what is the meaning of the immedi- 
ate vision of anything. Immediate knowledge is distinguished 
from mediate in that by the former we know a thing as it is 
in itself, whereas by the latter we know it only in another 
thing. Thus the knowledge I get of a thing I look at, is im- 
mediate, while that I get by seeing it only in a mirror, is 

The Postulaium is long and gives very cogent reasons for the 


condemnation. Owing to the early dissolution of the Council 
the subject was not reached. 

Rosmini was born in 1797 in Southern Austria (the Tyrol). 
His fame as a philosopher was already wide as early as 1821. 
In 1824 he was ordained priest. In 1828 he founded the Con- 
gregation known as the Institute of Charity. The rule of the 
Institute was formally approved ten years later by Gregory XVI. 
The Rosminian Fathers are "to embrace with all the desire of 
their souls every work of charity, without arbitrary limitation to 
any particular branch/' The founder died in 1855, beloved and 
revered for his virtues as well as for his great learning. 

Many of Rosmini's speculations were vigorously assailed as soon 
as published. But his admirers and defenders were both numerous 
and ardent. Two of his smaller works, Delle cinque Piaghe della 
santa Chiesa and La Costiluzi-<ne secondo la giustizta sociah were 
put on the Index in 1849. His opponents, among them several 
learned bishops, redoubled their clamors for the condemnation. 
Pius IX. ordered an examination of his works by the S. Congrega- 
tion of the Index. The result of the examination was the verdict, 
in 1854, Dimiltanlur opera Antonii Rosmini- Serbati. 

Now that Rosmini's theories are declared to be opposed to 
Catholic dogma, some people are puzzled at the seeming contra- 
diction of Pius IX. by Leo XIII., in a matter of dogmatic be- 
lief. But the -formula "Dimittitur" (Dimittantur) neither involves 
nor implies a shadow of approval. To a query put in 1880, 
the Holy Office replied June 2ist, "Sacra Indicis Congre- 
gatio . . . declaravit quod formula Dimittatur hoc lantum signi- 
ficat : Opus quod dimittitur non prohiberi." As we have shown 
elsewhere, the S. Congregation may refrain from condemning a 
book for very many reasons extrinsic to the publication. The 
book may be full of errors, but doing no harm, nor likely to do. 
It is only with great reluctance that the production of an esteemed 
Catholic author is condemned ; and then, never without notifying 
him of the errors, and giving him an opportunity to explain. 
If the explanation is unsatisfactory, the author retracts, and when 
the decree appears, condemning the book, the customary clause, 
Auctor laudabiliter se subjecit, accompanies it. 

What the reasons were precisely which induced Pius IX. to 
"dismiss" the works of Rosmini in 1854, it is no business of 
ours to know. But any one of many that will readily suggest 
itself, would suffice. No name stood higher in the esteem and 


veneration of ail Europe, at the time, than that of the Superior- 
General of the Institute of Charity. Then, in condemning 
Gunther, Frosch hammer, etc., and pointing out in his letters the 
errors in their theories, errors identical with Rosmini's, may 
not the kind-hearted Pius have thought that enough, and spare 
the honored name of the celebrated philosopher and spare his 
Institute? Might it not suffice, to teach the truth and distinctly 
point out the error without naming Rosmini ? Every one knew 
that the dimiltitur of the S. Congregation was no approval. 
Time and again the S. Congregation itself so declared. Thus 
on the 5th of September, iSSi, to the questions: (i) When books 
are examined by the S. Congregation of the Index and "dis- 
missed/' are they to be held as free from errors of faith and 
morals? (2) In case of a negative reply, and books so dismissed 
declared not to be prohibited by the S. Cong, of the Index, may 
one impugn their contents, whether on philosophical or theological 
grounds, without incurring a note of temerity ? 

The Sacred Congregation replied : To the first query No ; to 
the second Yes. 

Until Rosmini's works, or system, or school would become 
more dangerous than they seemed in 1854, there were very many 
reasons why the conclusion reached by the S. Congregation and 
indorsed by the Holy Father should be Dimitianlur rather than 
Prohibentur. But between Pope and Pope, between the Dimittan- 
tur of 1854 and the Prohibentur of 1888, there is no opposition. 

Besides, the decree distinctly states that the condemned proposi- 
tions were drawn principally from Rosmini's posthumous works. 
Consequently, the same matter was not submitted in 1854 to the 
Sacred Congregation as that submitted now. However, we attach 
little importance to this point. It is admitted that the germs of the 
doctrine now condemned were in the works passed upon in 1854. 
In next number we shall print the forty propositions condemned. 

We notice in A Catholic Dictionary what looks like a slight mistake 
.under the word " Rosminians : " The effect of which (the de- 
cision Dimittantur, etc.) was to declare his works undeserving of 
censure on theological grounds." Strictly speaking, the phrases 
Nil censura dignum and Dimittantur are equivalent. Neither 
implies any approbation. But the former phrase will be almost 
invariably taken as a measure of approval and had better not be 


used to mean Dimittantur. In reality each phrase merely means 
" Under present circumstances, no action in the case is necessary." 


1. The object of the Clerical Fund is to aid priests of the diocese who 
are deprived of their ordinary means of support by sickness or old age. 

2. Every priest in good standing ordained for, or incorporated into, the 
diocese, according to the decrees of the Third Plenary Council of Balti- 
more, Chap. vii. 2, Nos. 68 et seq. will receive aid out of the Fund 
in case of sickness, or when enfeebled by old age, and unable to labor in 
the diocese. 

3. The yearly assessment of each member shall be ten dollars ($ 10.00.) 
This amount shall be paid by the Church or Institute n to which he is 
attached, before the first day of December of every year. 

4. The ordinary of the diocese will be the treasurer of the Fund. 

5. The ordinary will appoint every year, at the conference held in 
April or May, four priests of the diocese, who, together with the ordi- 
nary; will form an Executive Committee. This Committee will decide on 
the best manner of investing the funds. 

6. Inability, from sickness or old age, to discharge the duties of his min- 
istry, shall entitle any priest of the diocese, who receives no emolument 
whatever from the church or Institution to which he is attached, to 
receive at the rate of six hundred dollars ($600) per annum, payable 
monthly or quarterly, as may seem best to the ordinary. 

7. Any rector, infirm or superannuated, who, by virtue of diocesan statute 
No. 146, receives at the rate of five hundred dollars ($500) per annum 
from the church to which he is attached, shall receive at the rate of 
one hundred dollars ($100) per annum from the Clerical Fund. 

8. Any priest who, by reason of infirmity or old age, is attached to a 
church or Institution from which he receives less than six hundred dollars 
($600), shall receive from the Clerical Fund an amount sufficient to make 
his yearly income six hundred dollars ($600). The board and washing of 
such priest will be estimated at the rate of three hundred dollars ($300) 
per annum. 

9. Should the ordinary ever inhibit any priest of the diocese the further 
exercises of his clerical functions, such priest shall, by entering some ap- 
proved religious Institution, and there conducting himself in a manner sat- 
isfactory to the superior of that Institution, and to the ordinary, be 
entitled to pecuniary aid : the amount and method of payment to be left to 
the discretion of the ordinary. 

10. In the event of the death of any priest of the diocese, a sum 
sufficient to defray the necessary funeral expenses will be appropriated in case 
that, in the judgment of the ordinary, circumstances should require it. 

11. No priest shall receive any benefit from the Fund, until his claims 
are approved by the ordinary. In all matters of doubt or dispute concerning 
the rights or claims of priests to a share in the Funds, the Executive 


Committee shall be the supreme judges, from whose decision there shall be 
not appeal. 

12. On the death of a priest of the diocese the secretary shall give 
notice of the same, and every priest of the diocese shall celebrate as soon 
as possible three masses for the repose of his soul. 

13. A yearly financial statement will be read at the clerical conference 
held in April or May of each year. 


All publications to be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the Editor, Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranford, N. J. 

SYNOPSIS CANONico-LlTURGlCA ex Corpore Juris, Concilio Tridentino, 
Romanorum Pontificum Constitutionibus, S. R. E. Congregationum De- 
cretis Ecclesiseque Mediolensis Actibus, Rational! Methodo Concinnata 
ab Aloysio Adone, Presbytero Neapolitano. Quarto, double columns, 
pp. 603. For sale by Benziger Brothers. 

This work is divided into three books I. De rebus ad sacrum 
cultum spectantibus II. De personis pr out ad sacrum culluni referuntur ; 
III. De sacri cultus multiformi ratione. In chapter after chapter the 
author, methodically, gives a full treatise De rebus, etc., beginning 
at the beginning De ecdesice cedificatione and ending with De prcelato 
visitante et ecclesia visiianda, but all through, in lieu of using his 
own words and referring us in foot notes to authorities that we 
never can or will consult, he talks to us in the very words or 
pertinent passages of those authorities. The law is before us at 
once and a reference given if we choose to test its verity. These 
600 pages of Adone are a miracle of learning, of research, of 
labor. And his arrangement of the vast matter he had to deal 
with is so scientifically methodical that any man, however un- 
acquainted with the subject, can find the question he seeks with 
the official decision in a nrnute. We know whereof we speak. 
We have been using the work for the last twelve months. It 
is most highly prized and praised by His Holiness, by Cardinal 
Parrochi, and by the celebrated canonist Sanguinetti. Those who 
wish to settle authoritatively all the ordinary and most of the 
extraordinary questions that present themselves to ecclesiastics, and 
especially to bishops and priests in charge of large churches, 
will find no work more serviceable than this Synopsis Cjnonico- 


juxta Breviarium Komanum cum Psalmis in extenso. Duodecimo, in red 
and black type with red line border, flexible morocco binding, pp. 152. 
Pustet & Co. 

It was certainly a happy thought of the great publishers to 
give us these offices in extenso. It was a loss of time always and 
of temper occasionally to be hunting up psalm after psalm of 
these offices in different parts of <he Breviary. The letter press, 
paper, and binding of this handsome little volume really leave 
nothing to be desired. The offices given are (i) Orationis D. 
N. J. C., in monte Olieveti, (2) Commemoratio Passionis D. N. J. C., 
(3) Ss. Spineae Coronae D. N. J. C, (4) Lancese et Clavorum D. N. 
J. C., (5) Ss. Sindonis D. N. J. C., (6) Ss. Quinque Vulnerum 
D. N. J. C., (7) Pretiosissimi Sanguinis D. N. J. C. 
THE ROMAN HYMNAL : a Complete Manual of English hymns nnd Latin 
Chants for the Use of Congregations, Schools, Colleges, and Choirs. 
Fourth Edition, by Rev. J. B. Young, S. J. Pustet &. Co. 
Second edition, revised and enlarged. Pustet & Co. 
"In the present edition we have made a number of corrections, 
though mostly of a typographical character. We have also added 
in the appendix several important documents." Author's Preface. 


Bierbaum, D. D., translated from the German by Mi?s Ella McMahon. 

I2mo., cloth, red edges, pp. 106. Benziger Bros., 1888. 

OF THE CHURCH : translated from the Italian of St. Alphonsus Liguori. 

Edited by Rev. Eugene Grimm, C. SS. R. 2411:0., pp. 320. Benziger 


This little bock needs no commendation to priests. 
A DAUGHTER OF ST. DOMINIC ; by Kathleen O'Meara : American edition, 

edited by Margaret E. Jordan. Introduction by Rev. J. L. O'Neil, 

O. P., of St. Mary's Church, New Haven, Connecticut. I2mo., cloth, 

pp. 136. Thomas B. Noonan & Co., Boston. 

The "Introduction" to this charming little volume is an unwar- 
rantable intrusion. So is the Appendix, except the bare document, 
p. 122. Wonder sensible people wont have sense! 
THE WAYSIDE TALES : Stories and Sketches by Lady Herbert. Octnvo, 

cloth, pp. 289. Thomas B, Noonan & Co., Boston. 

Translated from the French by Frances M. Kemp. 24mo., pp. 141. 
Benziger Bros. 
MARIA MAGNIFICATA: Short Meditations for a Month on Our Lady's 

Life. By Richard F. Clarke, S. J. 241110., pp. 36. Benziger Bros. 

"0/>/o magi's senlire compundionem quam scire ejus dcfinitionem. " a Kempis. 


MAY, 1888. 

No. 7. 


Rosmini's works are published in thirty-five volumes. They 
are mainly philosophical, speculative. Out of the multitudinous 
works he published during his life time, and other compositions 
that he was holding back until the "ninth year," and which 
he might have revised, rewritten, or destroyed, the Holy See 
thinks it for the good of religion and in the interest of the 
verities of revelation, to point out some forty propositions which,, 
directly or indirectly, impugn revealed truth. This is not done 
by way of condemning Rosmini, or putting a stain upon that 
great and holy man's memory, but merely in the exercise of 
the Apostolic office of the successor of St. Peter, to keep the 
flock of Christ, both sheep and lambs, from poisoned pastures. 

We are credibly informed that the examination of Rosrnini's- 
philosophical works has been going on quietly for a length of 
time. As this examination was to be calm and absolutely 
impartial, only men were selected for the work who were beyond 1 
all suspicion of bias. This was in accordance with the practice 
and the theory of the Holy Office. (See the Const. Sollicita ac 
provida, of Benedict XIV., THE PASTOR, III., 289.) Hence, as 
a matter of course, the Fathers of the Institute of Charity, which 
was founded by Rosmini, were not consulted. Indeed, for their 
own peace as well as for a guarantee to the world that the- 
examiners did their work thoroughly and without any interference,, 
the Fathers of the Institute, above all others, it was proper to 
keep in total ignorance of what was going on. And so they 
were kept. The formal decree of condemnation was pronounced 
on the forty propositions, Dec i4th, 1887. Not until Cardinal 
Monaco issued the official circular to the bishops of the world, 
on the 7th of the following March, did a whisper of the con- 
Copyright, Rev. VV. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 


damnation reach the ears of any of the Fathers of the Institute. 
Then did the dead Rosmini win a greater triumph than he ever 
won while living. Then was shown what manner of spirit he 
infused into the Institute he founded. Without hesitancy, with 
filial submission, the Fathers, one and all, did, what Rosmini 
himself did in 1849, they accepted with docility, without ques- 
tioning, the teaching of Peter. The Superior at once issued a 
circular to all the houses of the Institute, prescribing the duty 
of the inmates under the circumstances, and every Father 
complied with alacrity. Rosmini the man was greater far than 
Rosmini the philosopher. Rosmini the self-sacrificing, humble, 
devoted son of the Church lived in his followers, not Rosmini 
the philosopher. "By their fruits you shall know them," and 
if Rosmini is judged by his fruits, he certainly achieved a 
greater triumph last March than any he achieved during life. 

The official circular was not issued until March yth, 1888. 
It runs : 

Most Illustrious and Reverend Lord : 

Together with this circular there is transmitted to your Lord- 
ship the general decree issued by the Supreme Congregation of 
their Eminences the Inquisitors General with myself, a decree 
approved and confirmed by our Most Holy Lord, Leo XIII., 
by which several propositions taken from the works published 
under the name of Antony Rosmini Serbati, are condemned 
and proscribed. Wherefore your Lordship's pastoral solicitude 
and vigilance will be exerted Sedulously to guard the flocks en- 
trusted to your care from these condemned doctrines, and if, 
perchance, there be any persons in your diocese who lean to 
the condemned tenets, you will endeavor to get them to accept, 
with docility, the judgment of the Holy See. You will 


Erne ac Rme Domine, 

Hisce adjunctum littens transmittitur ad Amplituclinem Tuam decretum 
generale, quo suprema Congregatio Emorum Patrum una mecum Inquisi- 
torum Generalium, adprobante et confirmante SSmo Domino Nostro Leone 
XIII, pluers propositiones ex opetibus, quse sub nomine Antonii Rosmini 
Serbati edita sunt, damnantur et pro^cribuntur. Quapropter excitatur 
pastoralis cura et vigilantia Eminentise Tuse, ut a damnatis hujusmodi 
doctrinis oves fidei tuae concreditas quam diligentissime custodias ; ac si qui 


strive especially, though, to have the minds of the young, 
and particularly those who are the hope of the , Church, the 
students in the seminary, imbued with sound Catholic principles, 
gathered from pure sources, namely, the writings of the Fathers, 
of the Doctors of the Church, of approved authors, and parti- 
cularly from those of St. Thomas Aquinas. 

In conclusion, I pray God for your welfare and happiness. 

Devotedly yours in the Lord, 

R. Card. Monaco. 
ROME, March 7, 1888. 

Wednesday, December 14, 1887. 

After the death of Antony Rosmini Serbati, certain writings 
were published under his name in which many points of doc- 
trine, the germs of which were in his earlier publications, were 
more fully evolved and explained. These publications attracted 
attention, and caused Rosmini's works to be examined more 
minutely, not only by men given to theological and philosophi- 
cal studies, but even by the prelates of the Church. These 
singled out several propositions which did not seem consistent 
with Catholic truth, especially from the posthumous works, and 
submitted them to the judgment of the Holy See. 

Then his Holiness, Leo XIII., by God's providence, Pope, 
whose greatest care it is to preserve the deposit of Catholic 

forte sint in ista dioecesi, qui illis adhuc faveant, eos ad S. Sedis judicium 
docili animo recipiendum inducere studeas. Prsecipue vero eniteris ut mentes 
adolescentium, eorum prsesertim qui in spem Ecclesiae in seminario aluntur, 
germana Catholicre Ecclesire doctrina e puris fontibus Sanctorum Patrum, 
Ecclesiae Doctorum, probatorum auctorum, ac prcecipue Angelici Doctoris S. 
Thomse Aquinatis. hausta imbuantur. 

Et Emtiae Tuae manus humillime deosculor. 

Datum Romae, die 7 Martii 1888. 
Humillintm ct addirtissimus servus verus^ 
R. Card. MONACO. 

Feria IV, die 14 Decembris 1887. 

Post obitum Antonii Rosmini Serbati quoedam ejus nomine in lucem 
prodierunt scripta, quibus plura doctrinae capita, quorum germina in prio- 
ribus hujus auctoris libris continebantur, clarius evolvuntur atque expli- 
cantur, Quse res accuratiora studia non hominum tantum in theologicis ac 
philosophicis disciplinis praestantium, sed etiam Sacrorum in Ecclesia 
antistitum, excitarunt. Hi non paucas propositiones, quae Catholicae veritati 
haud consonas videbantur, ex posthumis prsesertim illius libris exscripserunt, 
et Supremo S. Sedis judicio subjecerunt. 

Porro SSmus D. N. Leo divina Providentia Papa XIII. cui maxinu 


doctrine pure and unsullied by error, sent these propositions for 
examination to the Sacred Congregation of their Eminences, the 
Inquisitors General for the whole Christian world. 

The result was that the Supreme Congregation, after a most 
painstaking examination, and after collating the propositions with 
the rest of the author's tenets, especially those advanced in the 
posthumous works, reached the conclusion that the following 
propositions, in the very meaning attached to them 
by the author, should be reprobated, condemned, 
and proscribed, as by this present general 
decree it reprobates, condemns, and proscribes 
them ; and no one must infer from the fact of 
these propositions only being singled out, that 
the other tenets of the author, not condemned 
by the decree, are at all approved. 

After an accurate explanation of the entire proceedings was 
made to our most holy Lord, Leo XIII., his holiness approved 
and confirmed the decree of their Eminences, and ordered it 
to be observed by all. 

1. In the natural order the human intellect perceives directly 
something of the divine nature as it is in itself, something 
that belongs to the divine nature. 

2. In using the word divine when speaking of things in the 

curse est ut depositum Catholicae doctrinse ab erroribus immune purumque 
servetur, delatas propositiones Sacro consilio Emorum Patrum Cardinalium 
in universa Christiana republica Inquisitorum Generalium examinandas commisit. 
Quare, uti mos est Supremse Congregationis, institute diligentissimo 
examine, factaque earum propositionum collatione cum reliquis Auctoris 
doctrinis, prout potissimum ex posthumis libris elucescunt, propositiones 

qua? sequuntur, in proprio Auctoris scusii reprolmiidas, 
danmamlas ac proscribeiidas esse Jiidicavit, proul 
hoc jffciicrali decrcto rcprolmt, daimiat, proscrilnt ; 
quiii cxiiidc cuiqimiii deduccre liceat ceteras cjiisdcm 
Auctoris doctriiias, qua* per lioc decretimi 11011 dam- 
iiaiitur, ullo modo approliari. 

Facta autem de his omnibis SSmo D. N. Leoni XIII accurata relatione, 
Sanctitas Sua decretum Emorum Patrum adprobavit, confirmavit, atque ab 
omnibus servari mandavit. 

I. In ordine rerum creatarum immediate manifestatur humano intellectui 
aliquid divini in se ipso, hujusmocii nempe quod ad divinam naturam 

II. Cum divinum dicimus in natura, vocabulum istud divinum non 


natural order, it is not my intention to use the word to signify 
an effect, not in itself divine, but proceeding from a divine cause; 
neither is it my intention to mean a something divine, but divine 
onlv by participation. 

3. There is, then, in this created universe, that is, in the in- 
telligences which are in it, a something to which the attribute 
divine is strictly applicable; not in a figurative sense, but in 
actual reality: and in its actual existence this "something" is 
not distinct from the actual existence of God, both being an 
indivisible entity and separable only in conception. 

4. Ideal being, which beyond doubt is present to all intel- 
ligences, is that divine "something" in nature, which is mani- 
fested to every man. 

5. That ideal being which man perceives intuitively (exempli 
gratia arbor in gentre] must necessarily be something of the 
necessary and eternal being, of the first cause, of the determin- 
ing and finishing cause of all contingent things: and this is 

6. In this ideal being, (conceived as distinct both from crea- 
tures and from God, indeterminate being,) and in the other 
being, God, (no longer indeterminate but actually existing,) there 
is the same essence. 

7. This ideal being which we perceive by intuition, initial 

usurpamus ad significandum effectum non divinum causse divinae ; neque 
mens nobis est loqui de divino quodam quod tale sit per participa- 

III. In natura igitur universi, id est, in intelligentiis quse in ipso sunt, 
aliquid est cui convenit denomiimtio divini, non sensu figurato sed 

Est actualitas non distincta a reliquo actualitatis divinae. 

IV. Esse indeterminatum, quod procul dubio notum est omnibus intel- 
ligentiis, est divinum illud quod homini in natura manifestatur. 

V. Esse quod homo intuetur necesse est ut sit aliquid ends necessarii 
et seterni, causse creantis, determinantis ac finientis omnium entium con- 
tingentium : atque hoc est Deus. 

VI. In esse quod prsescindit a creaturis et a Deo, quod est esse 
indeterminatum, atque in Deo, esse non indeterminato sed absolute, eadem 
est essentia. 

VII. Esse indeterminatum intuitionis, esse initiale, est aliquid Verbi, 


being, is the being of the Word; and the mind of the Father does 
not see this ideal being, as distinct in reality from the Word. 
("Ma secondo la razione," is hardly translatable.) 

8. Finite beings, of which the world is composed, are the 
result of two components, that is, of their real, infinite terminal 
form, and of that (ideal or) initial being which confers on that 
terminal form the form of being. 

9. This (ideal) being, which is the object of intuition, is the 
initial act of all beings. 

That initial being, therefore, is the initial of all things know- 
able as well as of things existing: it is equally the initial of 
God, as conceived by us, as of creatures. 

10. Virtual being (the possibility of being) and without limits 
is the first and most simple of all entities; so that every other 
entity is a composite, and into its composition this virtual being 
always and necessarily enters. It is an essential part of all 
entities, no matter though it may be conceived as separate fiom 

11. A finite thing is constituted what it is, not by any pos- 
itive attributes belonging to it, but by its limitations. The in- 
finite Being is constituted by entity alone, and that entity is 
positive; a finite thing is constituted by the limits of its entity, 
and its entity is negative. 

quod mens Patris distinguit non realiter, sed secundum rationem, a 

VIII. Entia finita, quibus componitur mundus, resultant ex duobus 
elementis, id est, ex termino reali finite et ex esse imtiali, quod eidem 
termino tribuit formam entis. 

IX. Esse, objectum intuitionis, est actus initialis omnium entium. 

Esse initiale est iniiium tarn cognoscibilium quam subsistentium ; est 
pariter initium Dei, prout a nobis concipitur, et creaturarum. 

X. Esse virtuale et rine limitibus est prima ac simplicissima omnium 
entitatum, adeo ut quaelibet alia entitas sit composita, et inter ipsius 
componentia semper et necessaria sit e-;se virtuale. Est pars essentialis 
omnium omnino entitatum, utut cogitatione dividantur. 

XI. Quidditas (id quod res est) entis finiti non constituitur eo quod 
habet positivi, sed suis limitibus. Quidditas entis infiniti constituitur 
entitate, et est positiva ; quidditas vero entis finiti constituitur limitibus 
entitatis, et est negativa. 


12. Finite reality does not exist : but God causes it to exist, 
adding, by his infinity, limitation to reality. ' 

The initial being becomes the essence of all real being. 

The essence that actuates finite natures, and is united to 
them, is an essence derived from God's. 

13. The difference between the absolute being and the 
relative being is not that which exists between substance and 
substance, but much greater ; for one is absolute existence, the 
other is absolute non-existence. Still, this other is existence, 
relatively. But by the actuality of this relative being, the 
absolute being is not multiplied. Hence, the absolute and re- 
lative being are not the one same substance, but they are the 
one same being ; and in this sense there is no diversity of 
being, but rather one single being. 

14. By divine abstraction is produced the initial being, the 
first element of finite beings : but by the divine imagination is 
produced finite reality, all those realities of which this universe 

15. The third operation of the Infinite in creating the world, 
is a divine synthesis, that is, the union of the two elements, 
namely the initial bein<*, the common beginning of all finite 

XII. Finita realitas non est, sed Deus facit earn esse addendo infinite 
realita! i limitationem. 

Esse initiate fit essentia omnis entis realis. 

Esse quod actual naturas finitas, ipsis conjunctum, est recisum a Deo. 

XIII. Discrimen inter esse absolutum et es?e relalivum non illud est 
quod intercedit substantiam inter et substantiam, sed aliud multo majus : 
unum enim est absolute ens, alterum est absolute non-ens. At hoc 
alterum est relative ens. Cum autem poniiur ens relativum, non multipli- 
catur absolute ens : hinc absolutum et relativum absolute non sunt unica 
substantia, sed unicum esse ; atque hoc sensu nulla est diversitas esse, imo 
habetur unitas esse. 

XIV. Divina abstractione producitur esse initiale, primum finitorum 
entium elementum ; divina vero imaginatione, producitur reale finitum, 

seu realitates omnes, quibus mundus constat. 

XV. Tertia operatio esse absoluti mundum creantis est divina synthesis, 
id est, unio duorum elementcrum ; quse sunt esse initiale, commune 
omnium finitorum entium initium ; atque reale finitum, seu potips diversa 

1 This is anything but clear. The Rosmini text is worded : La realita 
finita non e; ma egli (Dio) la fa essere coll' aggiungere alia realita 
infinita la limitazione. 


things, and the finite reality, or rather the diverse finite realities, 
the different termini of the same initial being. By this union 
are created all finite things. 

1 6. The initial being, directed, owing to the divine synthesis, 
by the intelligence to finite real forms, not as intelligible, but 
as mere essence, causes things finite to exist, both subjectively 
and in reality. 

17. The one thing God does in creating, is to place (peiform) 
the whole act of the being of creatures. This act does not 
properly speaking connote making, but simply action. 

1 8. The love God bears Himself even in His creatures, and 
which determined him to create, constitutes a moral necessity, 
which in a peifect being always produces effect: this species of 
necessity left only a choice among a number of imperfect beings. 

19. The Word is that -unseen matter, cut of which, as said in 
Wisdom xi. 18, all things in the universe were created. 

20. There is nothing contrary to reason in affirming that the 
soul may be propagated by generation ; to conceive it, namely, 
as progressing from the imperfect, to wit, the sensitive state, to 
the peifect, that is the intelligent state. 

21. When existence becomes a thing intuitively perceived 
by the sentient principle, by the very contact, by the mere 

realia finita, termini divcrsi ejusdem esse initialis ; qua unione creantur 
entia finita. 

XVI. Esse initiale per divinam synthesim ab ihtelligentia relatum, non 
ut intelligibile, sed mere ut essentia, ad terminos finitos reales, efficit ut exis- 
tant entia finita subjective et realiter. 

XVII. Id unum efficit Deus creando, quod totum actum esse creaturarum 
integre ponit ; hie igitur actus proprie non est factus, sed positus. 

XVIII. Amor, quo Deus se diligit etiam in creaturis, et qui est ratio qua 
se determinat ad CTeandum, moralem necessitatem constituit, qtite in ente per- 
fectissimo semper inducit effectum : hujusmodi enim necessitas tantummodo 
in pluribus entibus imperfectis integram relinquit libertatem bilateralem. 

XIX. Verbum est matetia ilia invisa, ex qua, ut dicitur Sap. xi. 18, creatse 
fuerunt res omnes universi. 

XX. Non repugnat ut anima humana generatione multiplicetur ; ita ut con- 
cipiatur earn ab imperfecto, nempe a gradu sensitive, ad perfectum, nempe ad 
gradum intellectivum, procedere. 

XXI. Cum sensitive principio intuibile fit esse, hoc- solo tactu, hac sui 


synthesis of the two, the principle, sentient merely before, is now 
rendered intelligent, is raised to a higher state, changes its 
nature, and becomes a being intelligent, self-existing, and 

22. It is not inconceivable that by the divine power the 
intellectual soul could be withdrawn from the living body, leaving 
the latter in the condition of an animal : for there could remain 
in the body, as the basis of merely animal life, the animal 
principle, which before was but an adjunct to the soul. 

23. The souls of those who live in the state of nature, are, 
after death, as if they did not exist : they continue to exist, but 
without any reflection or consciousness. Their condition may be 
likened to one of perpetual darkness and everlasting sleep. 

24. The substantial form of the body is rather an effect of 
the soul, being the internal terminus of its operations : hence 
the substantial form of the body is not the soul itself. 

The union of the soul and body properly consists in an 
in-dwelling perception, by which the subject, perceiving the idea, 
affirms the existence of the sentient being, after perceiving in- 
tuitively its essence in the idea. 

25. Once the mystery of the Blessed Trinity has been revealed,, 
its existence can be demonstrated by arguments simply speculative,. 

unione, principium illnd antea solum sentiens, nunc simul intelligens, ad: 
nobiliorem statum evehitur, naturam mutat, ac fit intelligens, subsistens atque 

XXII. Non est cogitatu inrpossibile divina potentia fieri posse, ut a corpo- 
re animate dividatur anima intellectiva, et ipsum adhuc maneat animale ; 
maneret nempe in ipso, tamquam basis puri animalis, principium animale, 
quod antea in eo erat veluti appendix. 

XXIII. In statu naturali, anima defuncti existit perinde ac si non existeret : 
cum non pnssit ullum super seipsam reflexionem exercere. aut ullam habere" 
sui conscientiam, ipsius conditio similis dici potest statui tenebrarum per- 
petuarum et somni sempiterni. 

XXIV. Forma substantialis corporis est potius effectus aniinse, atque interior 
terminus opemtionis ipsius : propterea forma substantialis corporis non est 
ipsa anima. 

Unio animse et corporis proprie consistit in immanenti perceptione, qua 
subjectum intuens ideam afnrmat sensibile, poslquam in hac ejus essentiatn 
intuitum fuerit. 

XXV. Revelato mystetio SSmre Trinitatis, potest ipsius existentia demon-. 


arguments indeed negative and indirect, but yet of such sort 
that the existence of the Blessed Trinity can be brought within 
the circle of truths grounded on philosophy, and be made a 
scientific proposition like the others : for, if this truth should be 
denied, the theory that the exisience of God can be discovered 
by mere human reason would collapse, and would remain not 
only incomplete, but would be so crowded with absurdities, as 
to be utterly annihilated. ' 

26. The three supreme form?, namely, subjectivity, objectivity, 
sanctity, or in other words, reality, idealilv, morality, are identical 
in essence. If these be conceived in the Being absolute, they 
cannot be conceived but as distinct, self-subsisting, and living 

The Word, not indeed as the Word, to wit, an object self- 
subsisting and self-conscious, but the Word as an object loved, 
is the Holy Ghost. 

strari arguments, mere speculativis, negativis quiclem ef indirectis, hujusmodi 
tamen ut per ipsa veritas ilia ad philosophicas disciplinas revocetur, atque 
fiat propositio scientifica sicut ceteroe : si enim ipsa negaretur, doctrina the- 

osophica punc rationis non modo inc >mp!eta maneret, scd etiam omni ex 

parte adsurdiiatibus scatens annihilaretur. 

XXVI. Tres supremse formse esse, nempe subjectivitas, objectivitas, anctitas, 
seu realitas, idealitas, moralitas, si transferantur ad esse absolutum, non 
possunt aliter concipi nisi ut persona subsistentes et viventes. 

Verbum, quatenus objectum amatum, et non quatenus Verbum, id est 
objectum in se subsistens per se cognitum, est persona Spiritus Srmcti. 

1 Kosmini's text V)ears but distant resemblance either to our Latin or our 
"English ; II mistero della Tiiade .... dopo che fu rivelato, esso rimane 
bensi incomprehensibile nella sua propria natura . . . ma ben ... si pu6 
conoscere quella (1'esistenzal d'una Trinita in Dio in un modo almeno 
congetturale con ragioni positive e dirrette, e dimostrativamente con ragioni 
negative ed indirette ; e che, mediante queste prove puramente speculative 
dell' esistenza d'un' augustissima Triacle, que>ta misteriosa dotlrina rientra 
nel campo della filosofia Quest' esistenza (della SSma Trinita) diventa 
una proposizione scientifica come le nitre - Qunlora si ncgasse* quella 
Trim i a, ne verrebbero da tutte le parti con-eguenze assurde apertamente 
.. . . O convieite ammettre la divina Tiiade, o lasciare la dottrina teosofica 
'di pura ragione incompleta non solo ma pugnante d'ogni parte seco mede- 
sima e dagli assurdi inevitabili straziata e dtl tutto annullata (Tens. Vol. 
I. nn. 191, 193, 194 pp. 155-158)." The same may be said of most of the 
propositions. However, it was the Latin text that accompanied Cardinal Monaco's 
Circular, and the Italian can be used only to give us a better irea of 
what the La'in proposition means. 


27. In the humanity of Christ the human will was so lifted 
by the Holy Ghost to adherence to its objective, the Word, 
that it completely transferred the guidance of the man to the 
VVord, and with such guidance the Word personally charged 
Itself, and thus, to Itself united human nature. Hence the 
human will ceased to be a personal will in the man ; and 
whereas in other men the will belongs to the personality, in 
Christ it remained passive in his human nature. 

28. Christianity teaches that the Word, the likeness and image 
of God, is impressed on the souls of all who with faith receive 

And the Word thus imprinted on the soul is really the Being 
infinite, revealed by himself, and whom we subsequently name 
the second person of the Blessed Trinity. 

29. From the Catholic doctrine, which alone is the truth, we 
do not think the following, as a conjecture, would be the slightest 
deviation : In the sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of 
the bread and of the wine become really the body and blood 
of Christ, when Christ makes that substance the terminal of His 
sentient principle, and vivifies that substance with his own life ; 
nearly in the same way as bread and wine are transubstantiated 
into our body and blood when made the terminal of our sentient 

30. After tiansubstantiation it is conceivable that there is 
thereby a something added to the gloiious body of Christ, 

XXVII. In humanitate Christi humana voluntas fuit ita rapta a Spiritu 
Sancto ad adhaarendum Esse objective), id est. Verbo, ut ilia Ipsi integre tradi- 
derit regimen hominis, et Verbum illud personaliter assumpserit. ita sibi uniens 
naturam humanam. Hinc voluntas humana desiit esse personalis in homine, 
et cum sit persona in aliis hominibus, in Christo lemansit natura. 

XXVIII. In Christiana ooctrina, Verbum, character et fades Dei, imprimitur 
in anima eorum qui cum fide suscipiunt baptismum Christi. 

Verbum, id est, chiracter in anima impressum, in doc rina Christiana est 
Esse reale (infinitum) per se manifestum, quod deincle novimus esse secun- 
dam personam SSmse Tiinitatis. 

XXIX. A catholica doctrina, quse sola est verita>, mini*re alienam putamus 
hanc conjecturam : In eucharistico Sacramento substantia pan is et vini fit 
vera caro et verus sanguis Christi, quando Christus earn facit terminum sui 
principii sentientis, ipsamque sua vita vivificat : eo ferme modo quo panis 
et vinum vere transubstantiantur in nostram carnem et sanguinem, quia 
fiunt terminus nostri principii sentienti 

XXX. 1'eracta transsubstantiatione, intelligi potest, corpori Christi glorioso 


incorporated with it, thenceafter indivisible from it, with that 
something itself equally glorious. 

31. In virtue of the words of consecration there is present in 
the Eucharist only that measure of the body and blood of Christ 
that will equal in quantity the measure of the substance of bread 
and wine : the rest of the body is present only by concomit- 

32. Since he who eats not of the flesh of Christ and drinks 
not of his blood hath no life in him, and none the less those 
who die after baptism, whether of water, desire, or fire, certainly 
enter into eternal life, it only remains to say that this heavenly 
food is administered to such baptized persons as never partook 
of it during life, at, or after the vciy instant of their death in 
the commencement of the life hereafter. 

Hence to the saints of the Old Law Christ, when he descended 
into Limbo, might have given himself under the appearances of 
bread and wine, so as to render them capable of the beatific 

33. When demons possessed themselves of the fruit (in the 
garden of Paradise) they fancied they could enter into man if 
he should eat of that fruit : for as the food is changed into 
the living body, they believed they could freely possess themselves, 
through the food, of the living body of the animal man and his 
subjective entity, and thus dispose of him at their pleasure. 

partem "aliquam adjungi in ipso incorporatam, indivisam, pariterque gloriosam. 

XXXI. In Sacramento Eucharistise, vi veibonun corpus et sanguis Christi 
est tantum ea mensura quse respondet quanlitati (a quel tanto) substantiae 
panis et vini quse transubstantiatur ; reliquum corporis Christi ibi est per 
con com ita n tia in . 

XXXII. Quoniam qui non manducat carnem Filii hominis et bibit ejus 
sanguinem, non habet vitam in se : et nihilominus qui moriuntur cum bap- 
tismnte aquce, sanguinis aut desiderii, certo consequuntur vitam seternam, di- 
cendum est, his. qui hac vita non comederunt corpus et sanguinem Christi, 
subministrari hunc coelestem cibum in futura vita, ipso mortis instanti. 

Hinc etiam Sanctis V. T. potuit Christus descendens ad inferos seipsum 
communicare sub speciebus panis ct vini, ut aptos eos redderet ad visionem Dei. 

XXXIII. Cum dzemones fructum possederint, putarunt se ingressuros in 
hominem, si de illo ederet : converso enim cibo in corpus hominis anima- 
tum, ipsi poterant libere ingredi animalitatem, id est, in vitam subjectivam 
hujus entis, atque ita de eo disponere sicut proposuerant. 


34. To preserve the Blessed Virgin from original sin, it was 
quite sufficient that a particle, however small, of the human seed, 
overlooked perhaps by the devil, should have remained uncorrupted: 
from this uncorrupted particle of seed, passed on from generation 
to generation, might have been born the Virgin Mary. 

35. The more we consider the order of justification in man, 
the more intelligible become the scriptural expressions that God 
covers up or does not impute certain sins. According to the Psalmist 
there is a difference between the sins which are remitted and 
those which are covered up. The former would appear to be 
our actual and free faults ; the latter, the sins not freely com- 
mitted by those who are of God's people, and which consequently 
do them no harm. 

36. The supernatural order consists in the manifestation of 
being in the plenitude of real form ; and the effect of this 
communication or manifestation is a sense of being godlike, which 
in this life constitutes the light of faith and grace, and which, 
completed in the next, constitutes the light of glory. 

37. The first light that renders the soul intelligent is ideal 
being ; another first light is again being, no longer ideal, how- 
ever, but actual and living ; this latter, concealing its personality, 
displays only its objectivity : but he who sees it (for it is the Word) 
sees God, though only through a glass, darkly. 

XXXIV. Ad prreservandam B. V. Mariam a labe originis, satis erat ut 
incorruptum maneret minimum semen in homine, neglectum forte ab ipso 
dsemone ; e quo incorrupto semine, de geneiatione in generationem trans- 
fuse, suo tempore oriretur Virgo Maria. 

XXXV. Quo magis attenditur ordo justificationis in homine, eo aptior 
apparet modus dicendi scripturalis quod Deus peccata qusedam tegit aut 
non imputat. Juxta Psalmistam, discrimen est inter iniquitates cure remit- 
tuntur, et peccata quse teguntur : ill EC, ut videtur, sunt culpje actuales et 
liberae; h^c vero sunt peccata non libera eorum qui pertinent ad popu- 
lum Dei, quibus propterea nullum afferunt nocumentum. 

XXXVI. Ordo supernaturalis constituitur imnifestatione esse in pleni- 
tudine sure formse realis ; cujus communicationis seu manifestationis ef- 
fectus est sensus (sentimentd) deiformis, qui inchoatus in hac vita con- 
stituit lumen fidei et gratise, completus in altera vita constituit lumen 

XXXVII. Primum lumen reddens animam 'intelligentem est esse ideale- 
alterum primum lumen est etiam esse, non tamen mere ideale, sed subsis- 


38. God is the object of the beatific vision, but not in the act of 
His own divine life, but only as he acts on creatures. 

39. The vestiges of wisdom and goodness found in creatures 
form a necessary part of the beatific vision : for they are collected 
in their eternal exemplar, and are that part of Him seen by the 
blessed, and furr.ish the motives for their everlasting songs of praise 
to God. 

40. As God cannot, even by the light of glory, communicate His 
whole being to finite beings, He cannot show nor communicate 
His essence to the blessed, except in a way that will accomodate 
itself to finite intellects : and so God manifests himself to them 
through His relations with them, as their creator, provider, re- 
deemer, sanctifier. 

tens ac vivens : illud abscondens suam personalitatem ostendit solum suam 
objectivitatem : at qui videt nlterum (quod est Verbum), etiamsi per 
speculum et in renigmate, vidit Deum. 

XXXVIII. Deus est objectum visionis bealificoe, in quantum est auctor 
operum ad extra. 

XXXIX. Vestigia sapientice ac boniiatis, qune in creaturis relucent, srnt 
comprehensoribus necessaria : ipsa enim in teterno examplari collecta, sunt 
ea Ipsius pars quae ab illis videri prssit (c/ie e loro accessibi/e}, ipsaque 
argumentum prsebent laudibus, quas in seternum Deo Beati concinunt. 

XL. Cum Deus non possit, nee per lumen glorire. totaliter se commu- 
nicare, entibus finitis, non potuit essentiam suam comprehensoribus revelare 
et communicare nisi eo modo, qui finitis intelligentiis sit acc<>mmodatus : 
scilicet Deus se illis manifestat quatenus cum ipsis relationem habel, ut eorum 
Creator, provisor, redemptor, sanctificator. 

Certe adveniente die judicii, non quaeretur a nobis quid 
legimus, sed quid fecimus ; nee quam bene diximus sed quam 
religiose viximus. Ubi sunt rnodo omnes illi domini et mngistri 
quos bene novisti dum adhuc viverent et in studiis florerent ? 
In vita sua aliquid esse videbantur et modo de illis tacetur. 
Utinam vita eorum scientiae ipsorum concordasset ! Tune bene 
studuissent et legissent. Bene doctus est qui Dei voluntatem 
facit et suam voluntatem relinquit. 

Magna sapientia, non esse prascipitem in agendis nee pertinaciter 
in propriis stare sensibus : non quibuslibet hominum verbis 
credere, nee audita vel credita mox ad aliorum aures efTundere. 



A few words by way of introduction. In July, 1884, the 
French Chambers, by a majority vote, enacted a law in virtue 
of which married persons could obtain a divorce for certain 
specified reasons, -The avowed intention of the promoters of the 
measure was not only to grant the married parties leave defi- 
nitely to separate, but leave also to marry again, if they chose. 

Anything like acquiescence on the part of the clergy and the 
leaders of the Catholic party would grossly mislead tiie body of 
the people. They would be led to believe that the Church 
countenanced the law in its entirety, including the legal right 
of the divorced persons to marry again. 

How then were Catholic judges, Catholic mayors, to act, 
whose official duties required them to take part in the admin- 
istration of this new law ? At the time, many resigned their 
posts rather than take part in its administration. Needless to 
say, the resignations were not unwelcome to the government of 
the day, and the vacancies were quickly filled. Others hesitated. 
Some could ill afford to throw up a lucrative position, while 
others doubted whether the mere perfunctory performance of the 
part devolving on them was any sin at all. There was Bel- 
gium across the frontier, where precisely such a law had been 
in operation for generations, and no one thought of accusing 
the Catholic judges who administered it of sin or disobedience 
to the laws of the Church. In Prussia, Catholic judges admin- 
istered such a law ; so in Great Britain, and, in fact, in every 
country in Europe, as well as in the United States of America. 

Further, the most conspicuous moralists of the Catholic Church 
in recent times taught that it may be not unlawful for a 
Catholic judge to hear and decide cases of divorce, considering 
how modern society is constituted, even when the divorce in favor 
of which he might pronounce resulted in giving the severed 
parties the legal right to marry again. We say, considering haw 
modern society is constituted. For, the marriage contract being a 
sacrament, ex natura ret it belongs exclusively to ecclesiastical 
authority to legislate therefor, and supervise its administration 
to decide the validity or invalidity of the sacrament, in general, 
or in a given case. Hence the Council of Trent, Sess. xxiv. cap. 
12: "Si quis dixerit causas matrimoniales non spectare ad 


judices ecclesiasticos, anathema sit;" because in these " cau c ae " 
there is question of the validity of a sacrament. When theolo- 
gians teach that Catholic judges can deal with matrimonial 
causes, they are not saying what ought to be, in the abstract, 
but what may be, under present circumstances. Only the circum- 
stances make the judge's act lawful. Those French judges believed 
that circumstances justified them in administering the divorce law 
in France, as well as circumstances justified their Belgian 
brethren acro-s the lines. Such was the stale of affairs in 
France in the closing months of 1884. They only grew w6rse 
and more complex as 1885 advanced. 

The real question to be decided was, or was thought to be, 
are the circumstances such in France, taken all in all, as to 
make it lawful for Catholic judges there to act as do their 
confreres in Belgium and other countries? None of the French 
bishops, it seems, would take it on himself to decide. Though 
the divorce law was the same in both countries, and there were 
many points of similarity between the circumstances condition of 
society of both peoples, there were many points of dissimilarity, 
too. To instance only one: Belgium had been under a foreign 
and a Protestant king and legislature, the Dutch. The people 
had grown used to the divorce law, and to witnessing their 
Protestant neighbors having recourse to the divorce courts. The 
doings of these neighbors little affected the honest Catholic 
Belgians. Those courts they understood, and understood they 
were not for them. 

If the object of these divorce laws had been only to justify 
separation of man and wife, for sufficient cause, and render 
each thenceforward independent of the other, they might be 
dealt with in some sort. But the real object was known to 
be not separation but the ulterior one of legalizing adultery. 
How could a Catholic judge be the willing instrument of any 
government in carrying such a law into effect ? And if not the 
willing instrument, why retain his office ? 

In these perplexing circumstances the bishops had recourse to 
the Holy See. A decision that the judge may retain office and 
administer the law would b.e sure to be construed into some 
kind of an approbation of the law. Such a decision would be 
misunderstood, misconstrued. And anything like an approval of 
the law, on the part of ecclesiastical authority, would be assumed 
to mean a tolerance, at least, of the main object of the law, 


the legal right 'of the divorced parties to many again. It was 
thought better to do no public act, but outline a course for 
the guidance of the bishops, and wait for the developments 
that time would bring. Accordingly the following circular was 
issued to the bishops of France : 

Sanctae Romanae et Univ. Inquisitionis Epistola ad omnes in 
Galhca ditione ordinaries. 

Post nuper restitutas penes Gallos an. 1884 divortii leges, 
plura a nonnullis episcopis Galliarum dubia huic S. R. et U. 
Inquisitioni proposita sunt : utrum nempe fas esset judicibus 
laicis in causis de separatione conjugum,, sive circa vinculum 
sive circa habitationem tantum, jus dicere ; utrum advocatis et 
procuratoribus hujusmodi causas agere penes judices laicos : utrum 
his, ad quos de jure pertinet, defensores officiosos, quos vocant, 
deputare ; utium denique syndicis (vulgo, maires) divortium pro- 

Emineniissimi PP. una mecum Inquisitores Generates, re mature 
perpensa, in feria v. loco iv. die 25 Junii, 1885, ita decernendum 
esse censuerunt : 

Attentis gravissimis reium, temporum, et locorum adjunctis. 
tolerari posse, ut qui magistratus obtinent et advocati causas 
matrimoniales in Gallia agant, quin officio cedere teneantur : 
dummodo (a) Catholicam doctrinam de matrimonio deque causis 
matrimonialibus ad solos judices ecclesiasticos pertinentibus palam 
profiteantur ; et dummodo (l>] ita animo comparati sint turn circa 
valorem et nullitatem conju^ii turn circa separationem corporum, 
de quibus causis judicare coguntur, ut nunquam proferant 
sententiam, neque ad proferendam defendant, vel ad earn pro- 
vocent vel excitent, divino aut ecclesiastico juri repugnantem ; et 
in casibus dubiis vel difllcilioribus suum quisque ordinarium 
adeat, ejus judicio se dirigat, et quatenus opus sit per ejus 
medium ad Apostolicam Poenitentiariam recurrat. 

Hoc decretum Sanctissimus Pater ratum habuit : ideoque omnibus 
in Gallia archiepiscopis et episcopis notum fit pro eorum norma 
per has litteras, ceteroquin non evulgandas. 

R. Card. MONACO. 

Here is expressed the mature (" re mature perpensa ") judgment 
of the supreme tribunal in the Church, a tribunal in which 
the Pope himself sits as president, declaring that, under certain 
circumstances, it is not unlawful for Catholic judges to administer 


that French divorce law in France. l But under no circumstances 
can it be lawful to do what is intrinsically evil, malum in se. 
Therefore, to pronounce sentence of divorce, in casu, is not an 
actus in se mains, but lather one that is permitted for reasons 
proportionately grave. 

Our conclusion is : With that decision of 1885 before us, 
it would be only a waste of time, even to read the arguments 
of any theologian, however great his fame, who sets out to 
prove that in no case can a Catholic judge administer that 
French divorce law, because his act would necessarily be one 
intrinsically evil, malum in se ; and, a fortiori, it would be a 
waste of time to read arguments by which it is sought to prove, 
in the abstract, that a Catholic judge does an act intrinsically 
and necessarily evil, in administering the divorce laws in any 
country. An act intrinsically and necessarily evil, no circum- 
stances can make lawful. 

Previous to the discussions called forth by the law of 1884, 
the state of the question was this : Wherever, as in Belgium, 
Great Britain, the United States, etc., divorce laws exist, they 
were administered, as a matter of course, by the most con- 
scientious Catholic judges without a suspicion of wrong-doing. 

1 \Vhat seems to us an unintelligible, if not ludicrous, interpretation of the 
above circular, is thus given by a theologian whose opinions on other 
subjects invariably command respect : " And here let us express our 
astonishment at expressions we frequently hear ! How many, after perusing 
this circular, said and still say that, owing to the difficulties of the times, 
the Holy See permits judges to pronounce sentences of divorce ; or, at 
least, tolerates their doing so ? But the phrase in the Instruction, Agere 
causas matrimoniales, was never meant to mean the judges may pronounce 
the sentence of divorce. It menus simply that they may treat matrimonial 
causes, - Noth ing more. That is ivhat the Holy See tolerates.' 1 '' Nouvelle 
Revue Theologique, Sec. Serie, Tom. VI. p. 491. On pages 493-94, the 
author, at the expense of a seeming contradiction, writes: "Nor let us say 
that the circular conceded nothing. It granted the judges leave to remnin 
on the bench. The Holy See tolerates the judge retaining his post, hearing 
the matrimonial causes brought before him, and pronouncing sentence." Hut 
on the very next page, 495, he unsays all this and on to the end of the 
article is striving to prove that Catholic judges, under any circumstances, 
cannot in consequence give sentence of divorce. 

It is hard to see how, as judge, a man may take up and deal with 
matrimonial causes, if he is n<~>t to give sentence, and it is equally hard 
to see what the Instruction of June 1885 was all about, if it was not to 
permit Catholic judges to administer the odious law, " attends gravissimis 
reruni, temporum, et loc.irum ciicumstantiis." 


While always denouncing these laws as un-Christian, neither the 
bishops nor the clergy of these countries ever uttered a word in 
condemnation of the judges who administered them. The judges 
did not make the laws, nor were they responsible for the 

When it was proposed to re-establish divorce laws in France, 
every effort was made by the Catholic party to avert the cata- 
strophe. During the struggle, some over-fervid theologians, as 
usual, went to excess. They fell to proving in print, in pulpit, 
in the schools, that a sentence of divorce, in whatsoever country 
pronounced, is an act intrinsically evil, never under any circum- 
stances justifiable. They insisted that the legal right to many, 
granted by the laws to the separated couple, was derived, not 
from the law, but from the sentence. Accordingly they insisted 
that, if the law passed, no Catholic judge could remain on the 
bench. The law passed, and many Catholic judges remained on 
the bench, and still remain. And no ordinary will suffer any 
confessor in his diocese to refuse them absolution, if the judges 
comply with the June Instruction. That is all that is meant by 
the answer of the Sacred Penitentiary to the following case: 

Eminentissime Domine : 

Judex quidam Gallus, olim theologies cultor, confessarium 
adit, variisque peccatis mortalibus declaratis, subjungit: " De 
sententiis a me latis in materia divortii civilis nihil est quod 
dicam, pater. Soleo enim divortium civile declarare quoties- 
cumque adsunt motiva gravissima sive ex parte mea, sive ex 
parte eorum qui ad me causam deduxerunt." " Prave actum, 
reponit sacerdos, neque decisionem legisti qua nuper (27 Maji 
1886) Congregatio generalis S. Romanae et Universalis Inquisi- 
tionis judices ita agere vetuit. " " Imo, hanc plane novi, pater, 
neque tameri me peccasse existimo propter sequentes rationes: 
1 Novisti et tu, pater, responsum nomine SS. Pontificis Gu- 
bernio Belgii recentius datum a Nuntio Apostolico. Porro actus 
in Belgio toleratus et in Gallia tolerari potest, recurrentibus 
iisdem circumstantiis, nisi certo afferatur prohibitio positiva SS. 
Pontificis, qua per simplicem approbationem decreti SS. Officii 
minime constitiiitur; 20 Non concordant Theologi circa hujus- 
modi decisionum valorem; 3 Denique, et hie est rei praecipuus 
cardo, in propositione ex vario capite justissime damnata (27 
Maji 1 886), ne unum quidem verbum legitur DE GRAVISSIMIS 
RATIONIBUS quae sive ex parte judicis, sive ex parte postulantium 


occurrere poterunt. Quum igitur opinionibus vere probabilibus 
liceat uti, et rite dispositus, ut confide, peccata mortalia tibi 
declaraverim, humilis te rogo, pater, absolutionem mihi impertire 
velis, ad quam ex omnium doctrina jus habeo." 

Confessarius adlaborat ut poenitentem inducat ad deponendam 
talem sententiam, sed frustra. Aliunde rationibus, quas protulit 
judex, motus, non audet sententiam suam illi imponere, et poeni- 
tentem absolutum in pace dimittit. 


Utrum confessarius recte egerit? 

An absolutionem denegare debuisset? 

Eminentissimi DD. Eminentiae Vestrae 
Humillimus obsequentissimusque servus in X, 


R. Sacra Pcenitentiaria, mature consideratis expositi?, respondet: 

Confessarios ttneri circa qucestionem proposilam judices dirigert 
juxla recentes declarations a S. Stde editas. 

Datum Romas, in Sacra Poenitentiaria, die 4 Aprilis 1887. 


The ordinary of the place was the proper person for Fr. 
Cazeneuve to consult. Had he done so, he would have received 
all the necessary information. 

In the case, the confessor should have sent the judge off un- 
absolved, and told him he need not return while he continued 
professing open disobedience to the doctrinal decisions of the 
Holy Office. 

The responses of May, 1886, seem to have been as much of 
a stumbling-block to the confessor as to the judge. The mis- 
understanding and consequent misuse and misapplication of that 
decree of 1886 (THE PASTOR, iv. 368) is the source of much 
confusion. It is a sin to steal a loaf of bread. The mere 
taking of the loaf is, however, not an act in se malus. If the 
question were put to the Holy Office, May John steal a loaf of 
bread ? The answer would be No ; or it would be, If John be 
famishing for food, and have no money to buy food, or can find 
no food for sale if he have the money, and provided he take 
only what he needs, John's act is not immoral. If the ques- 
tion should be asked, leaving out any of the conditions, the 
answer would be No. 

Now, in. June, 1885, the Holy Office issued a secret circular to 
the bishops of France, instructing them how to deal with 


Catholic judges and other officials who would be called on to 
apply the divorce law passed in France in 1884. In this cir- 
cular certain conditions were laid down as necessary to justify 
the officials' action. Place all these conditions in a query, as to 
whether the judge .under the circumstances may act, the answer 
would be, as in 1885, " Tolerari posse/' But leave out one or 
more of the requisite conditions, and ask whether in that case 
the judge may act, the answer would be No. John would not 
be justified in stealing the bread merely because he was 
hungry. He may have money enough to buy bread. 

Note now the bugbear decisions of 1886: 

An recta sit interpretatio per Gallias diffusa ac etiam tvpis 
data, juxta quam satisfacit conditioni ' prsecitatse judex, qui licet 
matrimonium aliquod validum sit coram Ecclesia, ab illo ma- 
trimonio vero et constanti animo abstrahit, et applicans legem 
civilem pronunciat locum esse divortio, modo solos effectus 
civiles solumque contractum civilem abrumpere mente intenda f , 
eaque sola respiciant termini prolatce sententiae? Aliis terminis, 
an sententia sic lata dici possit divino aut ecclesiastico juri non 
repugnans ? 

To this strpid query the answer could be only Negative. The 
querist had been told that public scandal was to be avoided ; 
and, avoided in this way, that the public should be given to 
know that the judge, in pronouncing sentence of divorce, so- 
called, knew and openly professed the indissolubility of marriage: 

" dummodo Catholicam doctrinam de matrimonio palam 

profiteantur." No matter what the judge intends. If he do not 
openly acknowledge the dortiine of the Church regarding the 
indissolubility, he cannot lawfully hear and decide cases of 
divorce. Now here is a judge in our hypothesis giving sen- 
tences of divorce. Every one has a right to believe that his 
words are to be taken in their literal meaning, that he is 
launching his decisions against the spiritual bond which is in- 
dissoluble. But he intends, etc. If intention were enough, the 
S. Congregation would not have so insisted on the other con- 

And where are the other requisite conditions in the case pro- 
posed ? Does the judge really think that he has any right to deal 

1 The petitioner refers to the circular. But the circular contained not a condi- 
tion but conditions. 


with matrimonial causes ? And if he have sense or learning 
enough to know that his every step in matrimonial proceedings 
is an usurpation of ecclesiastical authority, does he make his views 
on this head known to the public? Does he "openly admit that 
matrimonial causes should be tried before ecclesiastical judges 
exclusively ? " 

It was only a man little versed in the methods of the 
Holy Office proposed so silly a question. Every answer has the 
words in hypothtsi understood. And the Congregation does not 
make a new hypothesis but replies to the query, strictly con- 
fining its answer to the hypothesis given. Can John, who has 
no money to buy bread, steal a loaf? No. John may not be 
in any very urgent need of the bread, or perhaps John could 
get work and earn his bread. But fill out the hypothesis, as we 
did a page' or two back, and the answer would be, Yes: under 
the circumstances John's act in taking a loaf of his neighbor's 
bread would be justifiable. 

The proponent of the query in 1886, An recta sit inter pretatio, 
might be given some commiseration if he had not the explicit 
'instruction of 1885 before his eyes. How could that opinion 
be a rect-i interpretaiio of a decision calling expressly for several 
conditions, while the opinion dispenses with them, every one ? 

But not even these conditions, if all were present in the 
query of 1886, would suffice without that most important cir- 
cumstance of all mentioned in the circular of 1885, " de quibus 
causis judicare coguntur." The judges "coacti" are not in- 
dividually usurping, at least formally usurping, the functions of 
the ecclesiastical courts, and when everybody is~ given to know 
that the sentence is not directed to the vinculum or bond 
which constitutes Christian marriage, the sentence is not aimed 
at the divine law. The ecclesiastical laws are not violated, for 
they cease to bind cum tam gravi detrimento. 

To resume: The answer to the query, Will not good inten- 
tion alone make the judge's act justifiable ? is, It will not. 

Second query: " Poslquam judex pronuntiat locum esse 
divortio, an possit syndicus (Gallice, le maire) et ipse solos 
effectus civiles' solumque civilem contractum intendens, ut supra 
exponitur, divortium pronuntiare, quamvis matrimonium validum 
sit coram Ecclesia ? " 

In France the judge's duty ceases when he reaches the de- 
cision that, according to the law, there is or there is not ground 


for granting the divorce. If the former, the judge's decision is 
taken to the mayor. He registers the case and declares John 
and Mary divorced. It was actually the same official, the mayor 
of the town for the time being, who, on a former occasion, 
pronounced John and Mary man and wife, even before they 
were in reality man and wife, the so-called civil marriage. 

Now what does the mayor mean in declaring the parties 
divorced? From his other acts the mayor's intention should be 
so manifest to the public that no one can mistake his decree 
of divorce, even as a pretended disruption of the marriage bond, 
but only as a mere legal formality, stripping the couple of the 
mutual claim on each other which they originally derived from 
the law. He has no right to do that, sed cogilur. Now, if that 
mayor "openly profess the Catholic doctrine in regard to the 
indissolubility of Christian marriage," if he openly maintain, with 
the Council of Trent, that "marriage causes belong to the 
ecclesiastical courts," no one can be scandalized at what he 
does. All know what he means. The divorced pair know it. 
After his act, they know, they are as firmly married as ever. 
His act is not intrinsica'ly evil; for, it is one that is done in 
the ecclesiastical court. Given compliance on the part of the 
mayor with the conditions required by the circular of 1885, we 
see no reason why he,, as well as the judge, may not, with a 
clear conscience, perform his part in the proceedings. His act 
is only the complement of that of the judge. 

Now inspect the queiy. The circular of 1885 expressly stipu- 
lated for certain external, manifest conditions on the part of 
these officials to make their application of the law of 1884 
justifiable. In the face of this circular our proponent asks: 
May we not dispense with all these conditions, if there be only 
good intention? "An poss;' syndicus solos effectus civiles 
solumque civilem contractum illtdiclens divortium pronun- 
tiare?" How is the world to know what he intends? Will his 
intention obviate the public scandal created by seeing a respectable 
Catholic divorcing couples according to the law of 1884? In 
the intention of the legislature that passed that law, it was not 
" solos effectus civiles solumque civilem contractum " it was 
intended to affect, but the marriage through and through. The 
mayor who does riot make his intentions clearly known, who 
does not make his acts intelligible, is, so far as the public 
know, usurping ecclesiastical authority, and as far as in him 


lies rending asunder the divine bond of marriage. He is warring 
against the divine ordinance, "what God hath joined together 
let no man put asunder," warring, of course, fruitlessly but still 
impiously. Whatever be his intentions, his acts speak for themselves, 
and taken in themselves, without the qualifications required by 
the circular of 1885, they but utter blasphemy and irreligion. 

What an absurd question to put to the Holy Office, especially 
with the circular of 1885 before the man's eyes, Wont good 
intention suffice, let the external acts be what they will ? May 
a man blaspheme away from morning till night deliberately, 
provided he does not in his heart mean what he says, pro- 
vided he does not mean to hurt God ? This is exactly similar 
to the question, Postquam judex. If there were a superlative for 
the adverb Negative, that superlative should have been hurled 
back at the proponent. 

The third query differs little from the two preceding, only we 
are spared the intendens : Pronuntiato divortio, an possit idem 
syndicus conjugem ad alias nuptias transire attentantem civiliter 
cum alio jungere, quamvis matrimonium prius validum sit coram 
Ecclesia vivatque altera pars ? 

Here again absence of all conditions ! Can the mayor declare 
this couple, who are living or are going to live in adultery, man 
and wife ? Never, nor can he ever suffer the parties to think 
he made them man and wife, or the public to think he assumes 
to do so. It is not the mayor gives them leave to live with 
impunity in open adultery. It is the law, with the making of 
which the Catholic mayor had nothing to do. Now, if the 
Catholic mayor "palam profiteatur Catholicam doctrinam de 
matrimonio," the parties know he does not marry them. So 
does everybody else. Is his act an act in se mains ? It is not. 
Two minutes later he may be called upon to perform the self- 
same act for a decent Catholic couple. The act, viewed objec- 
tively, then, is not in se mains. Whatever license the adulterers 
have, they have it from the law, not from the mayor's act. 
That act creates, grants nothing. It is a mere sine-qua-non. It 
is in itself indifferent. Ex parte operis it is not intrinsically bad, 
ex parte operantis it is not bad, ex parte finis to fulfil the 
duties of his office it is not bad. Therefore, if the conditions 
required in the circular of 1885 be honestly complied with by 
the mayor, he can give no scandal, and, coaclus, he performs the 
disagreeable duty. 


Santi, Praelediones Juris Canonici, Lib. iv., Tit. iii., n. 55, thus 
writes : "Quid si fideles non possint ob impedimentum ccntra- 
here matrimonium christianum, habiles vero sunt ad contrahendum 
matrimonium civile, vel ex mala animi dispositione, praevideatur 
matrimonium coram Ecclesia contracturos non fore? Poteritne 
officialis operam suam praestare in matiimonii civili celebratione ? '* 

This seems to be the very case. The divorced man or woman 
is bound by the inpedimentum ligaminis and cannot contract a 
Christian marriage. But the law gives them all the right it can 
to form a union which the law is pleased to denominate marriage 
and to regard as marriage. Santi asks : What are the Catholic 
officials to do when a pair, who are notoriously inhabiles coram 
Ecclesia, present themselves to be married ? He answers : 

" O mittimus hypothesim publici scandali, quod ex adsistentia 
officialis possit in populo derivare ; quo in casu solutio quaes- 
tionis penderet a qualitate scandali, quod vitandum esset. 

" Restringimus hypothesim et co-operationem quarn secluso etiam 
scandalo habere potest officialis in illicita celebratione contractus 
civilis et in effeciibus malis, qui inde sequuntur. Haec co-operatio 
per se mala est et reprehensibilis ; ex lege enim charitatis nemo 
potest facto suo concurrere in malum proximi sui. 

Verum ex natura legis charitatis, quae in genere non obligat 
cum gravi praejudicio proprio, malitia co-operationis potest attenuari, 
imo etiam tolli, si officiali praesto sint validae rationes, ad adsis- 
tentiam suam et operam exhibendam, simulque pro parte sua 
studeat evitare malum proximi sui. Gravis autem ratio ad prae- 
standam adsistentiam esset debitum officii sui, et periculum amit- 
tendi officium ipsum, quoties renueret caeremoniali matrimoniali 

" Secluso etiam scandalo." Santi, before permitting the official 
to act, insists that there shall be no scandal. What else is this, 
but requiring conditions such as the Holy Office required in the 
circular of 1885 ? For, unless the mayor openly profess and 
manifest his belief in the Catholic doctrine regarding the indis- 
solubility of the marriage bond, how can he avoid leaving the 
impression on the pair and en the public that he is in very 
deed joining them in real marriage? 

Santi, therefore, would evidently answer this third query Pro- 
nuntiato divortio, etc., put in its present crude form, with a Negative ; 
while it is equally evident that, if the query were clothed with 
the conditions required by the circular, the mayor, coadus, 


would be justified in going through the legal form with the pair. 

It will be observed that those decisions of 1886 were of a 
relative character unintelligible without the full text of the 
circular of 1885. But the " litterae circulares non erant evulgan- 
das." It thus happened that the decisions of 1886 reached us 
before the earlier Instruction of 1885. We published the former 
in the October number, 1886, while we were unable to publish 
the circular of 1885 until January, 1887. 

In common with many others, we were puzzled at those 
May decisions. After publishing them the following brief note 
was added : "It will be remembered that, in the article 
Catholic Judges and Legal Divorce, we advocated the lawfulness 
of the judge's action. For with us, neither the law nor the 
judge, its exponent, intends or pretends to decide quoad vin- 
culum cor am Deo. For this country, or any other in similar 
circumstances, we liold the same opinion still, and for the 
reasons there given. (THE PASTOR, Vol. iii., p. 40.) Of 
France we cannot speak. The circumstances of that country 
are very different from those of the United States." THE 
PASTOR, Vol. iv., p. 368. It was plainly to be seen that we 
were staggered by those decisions which, standing alone, were 
absolutely unintelligible. They were in flat contradiction, 
seemingly, with the teaching of our most approved authors. 

Our learned correspondent "Sacerdos" seems to have been 
somewhat puzzled, too, by the strange decisions. He immedi- 
ately sent us a Casus Conscien/icE on Divorce. Referring to the 
decisions of 1886, he writes: "We maintain, however, that 
this decree does not change our previous reasoning. In the 
first place, the answer is given to omnes in Gallica ditione 
ordinaries, consequently not to the universal Church, but to a 
portion of that Church ia a defined territory, and existing under 
circumstances not precisely similar to our own." 

In this paper our learned correspondent clearly enough betrays 
the embarrassment created for theologians by these inexplicable 
decisions. He would have these decisions regarded as discipli- 
nary, whereas they are obviously doctrinal. The doctrinal 
decisions of May, 1886, are not addressed ad omnes in Gallica 
ditione ordinaries. It was the circular of the previous year, 
1885, that was addressed ad omnes, etc. The decisions of 1886 
were especially for France only in this way : Though doctrinal 
and general, they were issued to correct a false interpretation 


which French theologians were beginning to put upon the 
Instruction or circular of the previous year. Before they were 
ever issued the doctrine they inculcate was substantially taught 
in all our schools ; in saying this we do not mean that the 
absurd meaning attributed to them here and there by one-eyed 
theologians was taught in our schools. 

Belgian theologians recognized them at once as doctrinal decisions, 
true in Brussels as in Paris, in Berne as in Baltimore. But 
they had not then the key to their explanation. The divorce 
law had been in operation in Belgium for over a hundred 
years, nemine reclamante. These decisions seemed to declare the 
rooted practice absolutely immoral. They did nothing of the 
kind. The conditions exculpatory of the judges required by 
the circular of 1885, were always present in the Belgian divorce 
cases. However, the decisions being hard to understand, some 
little commotion was stirred up among the Catholic judges and 
among the clergy. The foreign minister appealed to the 
Nuncio, Mgr. Ferrata, for an authentic interpretation. The 
answer from Rome was : These decisions are not inttnded to 
affect Belgium. This answer was a ratification of the Belgian 
method of granting divorces. As we said, all the requisite 
conditions to make an act, certainly bad and reprehensible when 
stripped of conditions, excusable, are piesent in the Belgian 
Divorce Courts. (See the letter of the Nuncio to the Minister 
of Foreign Affairs, Vol. V., p. 190.) 

So far- as our Catholic judges are concerned, there can be no 
doubt of the existence of the requisite conditions. THE PASTOR, 
Vol. III., p. 40, and V., p. 74. The same may be said of 
Great Britain. 

After the appearance of the decisions of May, 1886, the 
Archbishop of Paris was directed to communicate with the 
bishops of France, and notify them that the Instruction of 1885 
was still to be their guide. There was no need of elaborating 
any new Instruction, as that contained all that was necessary. 
Had Fr. Cazeneuve made his enquiries of the nearest bishop or 
vicar-general, he would have been spared the trouble of appeal- 
ing to the S. Penitentiary and would have received a more 
satisfactory answer. As it was, he was politely informed that 
both the circular of June, 1885, and the decisions of May, 
1886, remained in full force. The nearest bishop would have 
told him to observe the Instructions of the circular letter, and, 


if he could not understand the May decisions, not to concern 
himself about them. 

With the orders to the Archbishop of Paris in his mind, 
Vicar- General Grandclaude could write in the January number 
of Lt Canonist, 1887 : "A la veiite, tout le monde est fixe 
aujourd'hui sur la doctrine/' 

In the February number he writes: " Aujourd'hui, par 
suite d'une declaration toute rcente et plus explicite de la 
S. Congregation du Saint-Office, le doute n'est plus possible 
sur la veritable pensee du Siege Apostolique. Aussi n'etait-ce 
pas sans etonnement que nous lisions dans L'Univers, du 6 
Fevrier dernier, une nouvelle instance, d'ailleurs timide et 
indirecte, en faveur de 1'opinion rigide. La redaction de 
1'estimable journal n' avait pas, on le voit, la moindre connais- 
sance de la derniere declaration dont il s'agit ; autrement on 
n'aurait pas vu apparaitre encore une fois les vieilles interpre- 
tations de la reponse du 27 Mai, qui reste toujours, pour le 
correspondant du journal, la regie supreme et universe! le. 

L'argumentation du dit correspondant marchait de pair avec la 
connaissance des faits. Apres avoir cite un article d'un journal 
Beige montrant, assurement sans difficult aucune, que la divorce 
est chose ties immorale, le collaborates de I'Univers rapportait 
la reponse decapiiee, comme de coutume, du 25 Juin, 1885, a la 
suite de laquelle il plagait celle du 27 Mai : puis s'6criait, d'un 
ton triomphant, comme si son opinion restait etablie par cette 
juxtaposition: 'Quoi de plus clair ! ' Oui, cher redacteun, rien de 
plus clair pour les aveugles, qui n'ont aucune teinture de la 
theologie morale. Aussi pour toute explication, renvoyons-nous 
a la derniere declaration du Saint-Office, le zele ecrivain, vraiment 
trop attarde ; et pour lui epargner d'autres meprises aussi cruelles, 
nous nous hatons de lui faire comnaitre que la dite declaration 
a e"te addressee, en Decembre dernier, a Sa Grandeur, Mgr. 
1'archeveque de Paris. Nous savons que cette decision, comme 
toutes les pre"cedentes, n' est pas destined a la publicite ; mais 
elle n' a pas ete rendue non plus pour rester absolument 
inconnue, mais bien pour 6clairer 1'Episcopat et les magistrats 
Chretiens sur la conduite a suivre touchant ^application ' forc6e ' 
de la loi nefaste du 27 Juillet 1884 : c'est pourquoi nous faisons 
hautement appel a cette declaration, plus explicite que toutes les 
autres, en invitant tous les int^resh^s a se renseigner par \' 
intermediate de NN. SS. .les Eveques : causa finita est" 


In number after number of the Canonisle the abbe" Grandchaude, in 
the most open and undisguised manner, appeals to this Instruction 
sent the archbishop of Paris in November or December 1886. 
The gist of the Instruction is, that the circular letter of 1885 
is to be still the bishops' guide, and that the archbishop is to 
communicate the decision to the bishops in the least formal 
manner possible. Seeing how the infidel press jumped at the 
occasion furnished by the previous documents to vilify the Holy 
See, the Episcopate, and all religion, it seems neither necessary 
nor expedient to issue formal instructions. That of 1885 will 
cover all cases. This conclusion is in strict accordance, too, 
with the reply of the Sacred Penitentiaiy to F. Cazeneuve. 

In addition to the authority of Grandclaude, who has long been 
vicar-general of his diocese and president of the seminary, there 
is the fact that the Catholic judges did not resign. Those 
Catholic judges of whom alone there was question approach the 
sacraments. They receive absolution and are never told that 
they ought to give up their position. But now, as there is no 
question of their Catholic faith, the public know what the judges 
mean when they state that, according to existing laws in France, 
there is just ground for a divorce in this case or that. The 
decision they pronounce " coacti," and the circumstances, the 
grave detrimentum for instance, make the act not good precisely, 
but justifiable. 

\Owing to the length to which we felt it necessary to extend this article, 
we must hold over our examinatijn of F, Buccei out's singular essay to 
next issue. Ed.~\ 


" Generatim utendum esse oleo olivarum ; ubi vero haberi ne- 
queat, remittendum prudentise episcoporum, ut lampades nutri- 
antur ex aliis oleis quantum fieri possit vegetabilibus." S. R. C. 
die 9 Julii 1864. (THE PASTOR!. 43.) 

The bishop's positive permission must be had to justify a rector 
in using a different oil. And the bishop cannot give permission 
unless circumstances render it morally impossible to procure the 
olive oil. Where such moral impossibility exists, the bishop can 
only commute the obligation of using the olive oil to permis- 
sion tc use, instead, some vegetable oil, for instance, cotton-seed. 

The Church is verv loath to change the materials in form or 


substance which have been used in divine service from the 
early days. Thus she peremptorily forbids the use of tallow or 
stearic candles at mass, as well as the use of cotton vestments or 

cotton altar cloths : quod usque ab Ecclesice primordiis ob 

reales et mysticas significationes indudum es! t rclineatur et omnino 
servetur. Dec. Gen. 15 Maji 119. 

And giving orders concerning the lamp of the sanctuary in 
the Old Law, God required that olive oil only be used: "Com- 
mand the children of Israel that they bring thee the purest oil 
of olives, and beaten with a pestle, that a lamp may burn always." 
Exodus xxvii. 20. There can be little doubt that this command 
was observed, from the very days of the Apostles, for the lamp 
of the new sanctuary wherever it could be lighted. And in 
Leviticus xxiv. 2 we read: "Command the children of Israel that 
they bring unto thee the finest and clearest oil of olives, to furnish 
the lamps continually/' 

Nor was it a matter of indifference, this choice of oil. For 
everthing great and small in the Old Law was intended to point 
to Christ, and refer to him proximately or remotely. Now the olive 
is the emblem of peace ; and that symbol of peace, ever burning 
in the calm sanctuary, betokened then, as it does now, the Prince 
of Peace. 

St. Charles in the eleventh synod of Milan decreed : " Lumen 
lampadum oleo olivae nutrietur, nee vero alteiius generis adhibe- 
atur, nisi quibus locis archiepiscopus ob earn causam concesserit, 
quia nullum ejus generis haberi potest." 

No bishop in the United States would now think of permit- 
ting the use of lard, petroleum, or gas, for the sanctuary light. 
By the decree of 1864, (THE PASTOR, Vol. i., p. 43), they are 
forbidden to do so. As the same decree intimates, they, for 
good reason, allow the use of cotton-seed oil. But even this they 
cannot allow unless the rector, applying for leave to use it, can 
lay before the bishop solid and sufficient reasons to dispense 
him from the use of olive-oil. 

On this subject we received the following a fe\v weeks ago : 

REV. DEAR SIR: Mr. Stoltzenberg's new sanctuary lamp, which has 
recently been advertised so extensively, does in reality burn continuously 
for eight or nine days, provided Stoltzenberg's English Sanctuary Oil is 
burned. I have had this oil analyzed by a good chemist, who pronounces 
it a good lard Oil. With a vegetable oil, Stoltzenberg's taper will burn 
no longer than any other good taper. And this must be the case until 
chemistry devises a method by which the gums contained in all vegetable 


oils can be extracted from them. As the vegetable oil dries, evaporates, 
burns, the gum remains as a thick and sticky substance. After a time, 
more or less long, this gum will clog the wick and put out the light. 
To separate the gum from the oil has hitherto baffled the art of the 
chemist in his endeavors to furnish an improved vegetable oil for the 
sanctuary and for other purposes. 

Lard oil contains no gum. Consequently the wick or taper in lard oil 
remains free ; and, given certain conditions, as in a candle proportion 
between the consumption of wick and oil the wick in lard oil ought to 
burn for an indefinite length, as long as any of the wick and oil remain. 

But because of its superiority as a burner over olive or vegetable oil. no 
clergyman would use lard oil in the sanctuary. The thing is forbidden 
positively. He might as well use petroleum. And there would be an 
additional reason for using petroleum for the sanctuary lamp. It is cheaper 
than that English lard oil. And if it be an object to sive the labor of 
attending the sanctuary lamp, why not use gas ? But gas, petroleum, and 
lard oil are all equally forbidden, - one not more so than another. 

Those who allowed Mr. Stoltzenberg the use'of their names and so aided 
him in imposing on tne unsuspecting by palming off his lard oil as 
vegetable, are surely much to blame. They should have observed that 
Mr. Stoltzenberg does not himself claim that his oil is a vegetable oil. 
Of course he does not go out of his way to remind his customers that it 
is not. It was their business to enquire. If he informed them that it 
was lard oil they would have none of it, of course, for the sanctuary. 
But the name given the oil was, in its way, an invention worthy of a 
genius, English SitllC'tllitr.V Oil. That word Sanctuary forestalls all 
suspicion. Sanctuary oil, whether English, French, or German, is at once 
supposed to be all right. 

Priests who have been taken in by this English Sanctuary Oil dre not 
use it. They ought to try to get their money back. 

You may make any use of this letter you like. I speak only in the 
interest of right and truth. I am not personally acquainted with Mr. 
Stoltzenberg, nor have I had any dealings with him. 

J F . 

The following letter explains itself. On demand we are at liberty 
to furnish Mr. Stoltzenberg with Father J. F's name and address. 
There is evidently a mistake somewhere. If the oil be what it 
should be for the sanctuary, and if Mr. Stoltzenberg can furnish 
satisfactory proof that it is not lard oil but a vegetable oil, this 
little breeze about it will be a telling advertisement. But if the 
oil be what J. F. claims it is, merely a good lard oil, the sooner 
Mr. Stoltzenberg is made acquainted with the fact the sooner will 
he, as a respectable merchant, withdraw his English Sanctuary 
Oil from the market. 

New York May 26th, 1888. 
REV. DEAR SIR: Your favor of May 24th came to hand this morning, 


and we beg to state that we appreciate your kindness in informing us of the 
rumor in reference to our oil. 

// is not a Lard Oil, but a guaranteed pure vegetable oil ; and if you 
will kindly hold over this communication of which you speak till your next 
issue, we will have a chance to furnish you with a correct analysis. 

Ours is, besides, an imported oil, and we are unable to find any mention 
of a Lard Oil in the schedule of duties of oils listed by the government ; 
so, most probably, the reverend gentleman in question has made a mistake. 
With renewed thanks and awaiting your reply we are 

Yours etc. 

Stoltzenberg & Co. 

Any tests or proofs of the oil being purely vegetable, we shall 
gladly publish. But we do not want such tests made in Bar- 
clay Street. Let Mr. Stoltzenberg get two or three of the clergy at 
a distance, to whom he sold the oil, to have it analyzed at his 
expense, and transmit us the chemists' reports. 

Then Mr. Stoltzenberg can refer us to the Engli-h firm or 
refinery whence he gets the English Sanctuary Oil, and name a 
few of the prelates or priests who use the oil over there. 

Mr. Stoltzenberg's Oil costs nearly the same as olive oil. Clear 
pure cotton seed oil the very best of burning oils in the vegetable 
family, can be purchased at 70 cts a gallon. 

THE INDEX. A book may be put on the Index for very many 
reasons. A book, though sound in principle, though written by 
a Catholic author whose orthodoxy is above suspicion, may' be 
liable to be misunderstood in a ceitain juncture of affairs, may 
be calculated to do harm, that book may be put on the 

We find a book on the Indtx entitled La Devotion au Sacre 
Cocur de Noire Seigneur Jesus Christ, par un Pere de la Com- 
pagnie de Jesu'.. It was proscribed by a decree dated March 11, 
1704. The work was attributed to a French priest, Father John 
Croiset, S. J. Since 1704, the title of the book was set down 
in every edition of Index Librorum Prohibitorum. On the 24th of 
last August the Sacred Congregation of the Index ordered the 
title of Croiset's book to be omitted in future editions of the 
Index The work was placed on the Index as a matter of 
prudence suggested by soms local or transient circumstances. 

"Opto magis senlire compimdionem quam scire ejus definition em. " a Kempis. 


JUNE, 1888. 


In reality all serious question as to the morality of the 
Catholic Judge's act in pronouncing sentence of divorce in ac- 
cordance with the law under certain circumstances, was dropped 
more than a year ago. A few lay editors in France, and an 
odd crank of a shallow theologian here and there, continued to 
amuse themselves and the public with quibbling essays on the 
other side. But no one heeded them, or they were occasionally 
mercilessly rapped and laughed at by educated theologians. 

Matters had reached this point, and we were flattering our- 
selves that we were done, for good and all, with the question 
of Catholic "Judges and Legal Divorce, when the Encliiridion Morale 
of F. Bucceroni came to hand. To our consternation we dis- 
covered that the man selected to fill the chair of Moral in the 
Gregorian University, the man chosen from hundreds to fill the 
post once adorned by Gury, by Ballerini, through some eccen- 
tricity of genius holds that legal divorce is never justifiable. To 
prove his opinion he publishes a special essay in the form of an 
appendix to his Enchiridion. 

While we should not notice an essay in the same direction by 
any ordinary writer, the position held by F. Bucceroni forbids 
us to treat anything from his pen cavalierly. He compels 

The extrinsic argument, based solely on authority, derives much 
weight from the addition of Bucceroni's name. But that is 
completely offset by the authority of his confreres Lehmkuhl and 
Sabetti on the other side. Nor is that all. There is not a 
Jesuit Father on the mission in this country, in England, in 
Belgium, who is not with Lehmkuhl and Sabetti. Further, all 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 


the secular priests are with them. So are the bishops. In 
setting up his own individual opinion against this weight of 
authority, F. Bucceroni seems somewhat wanting in modesty. 
Besides, he evidently declines to enquire of one or other of the 
French bishops regarding that decision of the Holy Office 
communicated, November or December, 1886, to the archbishop of 
Paris. He shuts his eyes to the positive declaration of the 
circular of 1885, that, under certain circumstances, a secular judge 
can lawfully apply the French divorce law of 1884. In the teeth 
of all authority, in the face of practice approved for a hundred 
years by the hierarchy, F. Bucceroni undertakes to prove that a 
sentence of divorce pronounced by a lay judge is intrinsically evil. 
In connection with this matter there are two things neither 
of which can we reasonably expect from the great majority of 
our readers; first, that all have Fr. Bucceroni's volume at hand; 
and second, that in stating the learned Father's arguments we 
should not be thought to be doing him injustice as not pre- 
senting them in their full original force. For, a priori, no one 
would readily believe* that the renowned professor of the Gre- 
gorian University would rest a conclusion on lame and incon- 
clusive arguments. There is only one way open to us to meet 
these difficulties, namely, to give the text in full of Bucceroni's 
little essay. We do so the more willingly, since in this essay 
the Roman professor epitomizes every argument that we have 
anywhere seen advanced against the lawfulness of the judge's 
act, from the beginning of the discussion, four years ago. 



1. Sententiam hanc illicitam prorsus *esse patet ex pluribus de hac re 
decisionibus S. Poenitentiarire et S. U. Inquisitionis. Qurcritur utrum sit 
intrinsece illicita ? Respondendum omivno est affirmative. 

2. Etenim primo, si qua lex est, quse aliquid contineat contra jus na- 
turale et divinum, lex profecto est divortii quoad ipsum matrimonii vinculurn, 
Atqui "si scriptura legis contineat aliquid contra jus naturale, injusta est, 

nee habet vim obligandi et icleo secundum eas non judicandum." 

S. Thorn. 2. 2, q. 60, a. 6 ad I.; secus enim judicaretur sccnndum in- 
jttstitiam el contra jus naturale et divinum, quod eerie intrinsece illicitum 
est. Nee profecto minus intrinsece illicitum est in hac re matrimonii, quam 
in alia quavis re temporalis boni et proprietatis, sententiam ferre judicem 
contra jus naturale et divinum. 


3. Intrinsfce illicitum est partibus sententiam petere contra jus naturale et 
divinum. Intrinsece illicitum consequenter est advocate hanc eandem .sen- 
tentiam petere et patrocinari: advocatus enim se tenet ex parte clientis et 
clientem reprsesentat. Ergo multo magis intrinsece illicitum est sententiam 

ferre contra jus naturale et divinum. Atqui iterum sententia divortii contra 
vinculum matrimonii naturali et divino jure indissolubilis, sententia est contra 
idem jus naturale et divinum. 

4. Intrinsece illicita et iniqua est ipsa lex divortii. Ergo adhuc magis 
intrinsece illicita et iniqua est sententia divortii. Sane lex est de se quasi 
speculativo-practica. Quatenus speculative consideratur enunciatio legis est 
illicita, et iniqua non est, sed falsa et absurda. Quatenus vero practice in- 
spiciatur, tune quidem illicita et mala est. Porro sententia judicis est, quce 
earn de facto practicam seu practico-practicam constituit. " Sententia judicis 
est quasi qutedam particularis lex in aliquo particular! facto." S. Thorn. 2. 
2, q. 67, art. I. Conchesio. 

5. Intrinseca ista malitia confirmatur evidenter ex decisioriibus variis S. 
U. Inquisitionis ; talis enim sententia dicitur deflectens a principiis juris 
naturalis et repugnans juri divino. 

6. Xeque vero aiiquid probant adversariorum rationes. Dicunt primo quod 
ilia sententia non est intrinsece mala, si consideretur in se et ratione sui, 
ratione nempe ipsius actus : quia judex nihil aliud facit, quam declarare 
legem in casu particulari. Atqui intrinsece mSlum non est declarare id 
quod lex iniqua continent. Sed hsec ratio nihil prorsus valet. Judex enim 
non utcumque declarat legem, sed declarat avthentice et auctoritative, definiens 
vel determinans justum sive jus in casu particulari. --S. Thorn. 2. 2, q. 60, 
a. I. Conclusio. Intrinsece malum est auctoritative et juridice declarare, 
haud quidem speculative, sed omnino practice, justum esse quod in se est 
injnstitm, jus esse quod in se injuria est. Homines, inquit Aristoteles et 
post Aristotelem S. Thomas, 1. cit., ad judicem confugiunt, sicut ad quam- 
diim justitiam animatam. In prx'senti casu judex non est nisi injustitia ani- 
mata. Ratione hac ab adversariis adducta probaretur etiam, quod judices sub 
Komanis imperatoribus potuerint licite condemnare Christianos, quia reapse 
nihil aliud faciebant, quam mere declarare in casu particulari imperatorum 

7. Hinc alia dissolvitur ratio, quod nempe in casu, de quo agitur, 
co-operatio judicis ad peccatum sit materialis tantum et minime de se 
efficax, qure gravi interveniente causa licita est. Matrimonium novum 
ineundum nonnisi a partium voluntate dependet, quns possunt abuti ilia 
sententia. Quamvis co-operatio judicis materialis tantum sit, cessio tamen 
proprii officii, quse pro causa excusante affertur, causa certe sufficiens non 
est ad cohonestandum tantum damnum quod et in familias et in ipsam 
societatem provenit ex ista impiissima divortii lege, ut ipsa constat experientia. 
Verum co-operatio judicis natura sua formalis est, et de se efficax, quamvis 
actus secundus novi matrimonii, scu adulterii, ab ipsa partium libera volun- 
tate dependeat. Est natnra sua formalis, quia tota quanta est tendit in 
faciendum facullateni ex parte legis convolandi ad alias nuptias, qure res 
certe iniquissima in se est. Est natura sua efficax, quia proedicta nubendi 
facultas ex parte legis, in casu particulari et determinata persona, nonnisi 
sententia judicis effecta est. Et si, prolata divortii sententia, conjux alter 


ad alias nuptias de facto convolet, altcro conjuge rcclamante tt excipientCj 
frustra hie reclamat et exceptionem objicit ; ipsa lege ipsaque judicis senten- 
tia conjux alter in suo adulterio protegitur et c immunitur. "Judicium," 
ait Angelicus Doctor, 2. 2, q. 60, art. 6 ad I., " importat quamdam impul- 
sionem, et ideo injustum est, quod aliquis judicatur ab eo, qui publicam 
auctoritatem non habet." Et idem Angelicus Doctor, 1. c., q. 67, art i, 
inquit " Sententia judicis est quasi qucedam particularis lex in aliquo par- 

ticulari facto. Et ideo, sicut lex generalis debet habere vim coactivam 

ita etiam et sententia judicis debet habere vim coactivam, per quam con- 
stringatur utraque pars ad servandam sententiam judicis; alioquin juclicium 
non esset efficax." Parum aut nihil refert, quod adulterium de facto pen- 
deat a libera parlium voluntate. Si judex facultatem faceret iniquis et 
impiis hominibus occidendi clericos, spoliandi ecclesias, nonne formaliter et 
efficaciter co-operaretur, quamvis actu et de facto, (quia judex non jubet 
et cogit ad illam occisionem et spoliationem,) occisio et spoliatio prcedicta 
a libero arbitrio pendeat illorum facinoiosorum hominum. Tandem tarn 
verum est in casu nostro fieri per legem et judicis sententiam facultatem et 
civile jus convolandi ad alias nuptias, ut, hisce contractis, jam istud jus 
acquiritur novo conjugi ; ita ut clurante novo is;o matrimonio prohibetur 
re;lditus ad proprium et verum cunjugem ; et novus conjux poterit semper 
juridice invocare favorem legis sibi concessum. 

8. Xeque vero instare valet dicendo, quod judex potest privatim monere 
paries de jure natural! et divino; immo quod in Considerandis praeviis 
sententiae, optime asserere potest catholicam de hac re doctiinam. Unde est, 
quod ejus sententia non erit nisi mera crcremonia exterior, et 
solemnitas quaedam, vel potius mera formalitas sine ulla vi et robore. 
Admonitio pracvia et privalim facia a judice, expressio etiam dpctrinae . 
EcclesiiE in Considerandis prceviis sententiEe, non immutat naturam intrinsecam 
sententiae: immo ostendit magis hujus iniquitatem, contra quam judex vult 
protestari. Ilia protestatio et admoniiio privatim ficta personae privatae est. 
Sententia est personac juridical et publics. In hujusmodi judice habetur 
vera contradictio practici. Nam sancit uti judex sua sententia illud ipsum, 
quod uti Christianas fidelis affirmat esse contra jus naturale et divinum. 
Crescit, uti patet, contradictio, si ilia protestatio et admonitio ponatur in 
ipsis Considerandis prseviis sentenliae, qux imnet semper authentica, jnridica, 
au'toritativa definitio seu de terminal io non justi seu juris, sed injnsti et 
injuries. Hac ipsa sua sententia judex aperte confitetur, quod intcrpres 
jitstitia: non est, sed interpres injnstitiic ex publica anclorilate. S. Thorn., 
2. 2, q. 60, arts, 5 et 6., et q. 67, arts I et 2. Et hoc profecto intrin- 
sece illicitum est. 

9. Neque iterum instare valet, quod 'ilia judicis sententia non sit nisi mera 
quaedam permissio. Ac ut permittitur libertas cultuum, ita etiam divortium 
permitti potest. Ista ratiocinatio, si ])robet, probat etiam ipsam legem 
divortii non esse intrinsece malam. Immo hoc proprie et directe probat.' 
Judex enim, ut ipsi adversarii asserunt, nihil aliud facit, nisi mere declarare 
et applicare legem in casu particulari. Aut ergo debent dicere illam legem, 
prout de facto est, non esse intrinsece malam, aut debent fateri intrinsece 
malam esse etiam sententiam judicis. Praeterea, si intrinsece mala est, ut 
etiam ipsi adversarii affirmant, actio syndici, qui pronunliat dissolutionem 


vinculi veri matrimonii, vel validitatem secundi matrimonii, non obstante 
primo vero et legitimo matrimonio : quomodo intrinsece mala non est sen- 
tentia judicis, quos illam facultatem tnbuit syndico, et jus partibus illam de- 
clarationem a syndico exigendi ? An intrinsece illicita esse potest executio 
alicujus actionis, quin sint intrinsece illicita vel ratihabitio, vel mandatum, 
vel jus collatum ad illam aclionem ? Tune valeret paritas libertatis cultus, 
quando uti pro libertate cultuum, ita pro divortio lex esset mera permissio, 
h. e., permissio negativa, quatenus nempe licet legislator divortium uti 
crimen haberet, illud tamen toleraret et non puniret, in determinatis quibus- 
dam circumstantiis, ne gravius inde damnum in reipublicse detrimentum 
sequeretur. Cf. S. Thorn. 2. 2, q. 10, a. n. Atqui lex divortii, uti de facto 
habetw, est utique permissio divortii, sed permissio positiva, divortium 
auctorizans, divortii civile jus tribuens, et potestatem faciens convolandi ad 
alias nuptias coram ipso magistrate civili, novum matrimouium rati habente. 

10. Alii, qui contrarium siistinent opinandi modum, aliam afferunt rationem. 
Dicunt quod prsefata sententia non est intrinsece mala, si consideretur ejus 
objectum ; actus ex objecto- specificantur. Enimvero objectum illius senten- 
tise non est vinculum matrimonii dissolvendum, vel simpliciter facultas 
civilis facta convolandi ad alias nuptias, sed dumtaxat commoda et effectus 
civiles, quos ilia sententia tollit, seu quibus ilia sententia matrimonium 
aliunde indissolubiie privat, civilium jurium cessationern definiendo. Verum 
hoc falso penitus asseritur. Objectum intiinsecnm immediatum sententiae 
judicis, eandem sententiam specificans, est ipsum objectum intrinsecum im- 
mediatum legis. Hoc constat ex ipsa natura sententia: judicialis, ex doctrina 
manifestissima omnium theologorum, prsesertim S. Thornse. Judex enim suo 
judicio seu sententia nihil aliud facit nisi auctoritative interpretari legem, 
definire, determinare legem in casu particulars Quare aut dicendum est 
quod ipsa lex divortii non est intrinsece illicit a, aut si ilia intrinsece illicita 
est, etiam sententia divortii intrinsece illicita est. Audiatur Angelus Scholte : 
" Ille qui judicium fert, legis dictum quodammodo interpretatur applicando 
ipsum ad particulare negotinm. Cum autem ejtisdem auctoritatis sit legem 
interpretari et legem condere, sicut lex condi non potest nisi publica 
auctoritate ; ita nee judicium ferri potest, nisi publica auctoritate, etc." 2. 
2. q. 60, art. 6. Idem docet Angelus nostne Schole in art. precedent!, ubi 
inquit judicium esse definitionem vel determinationem justi, seu legis script.?, 
in qua continetur vel jus naturale vel jus positivum. Hrec eadem est mens 
Angelici Doctoris, cum elicit quod sententia judicis est quasi in aliquo 
particular! facto, ib., q. 67, art. i. Sententia enim judicis non est lex parti- 
cularis judicis, legem simpliciter conslituendo ; sed legem constitutam jam 
a legislatore applicando, definiendo, determinando in casu particular!. 

11. Instatur et asseritur illam sententiam attingere tantum contractum 
civilem, non contractual sacramentum ; ilium nempe contractum, vel speciem 
contractus, qui est realiter distinctus a contractu sacramento, et habet locum 
coram magistratu civili. Lex ad sacramentum non attendens, ut matrimonium 
habet hunc contractum, qui tamen matrimonium vere non est. Hinc 
sententia divortii pro objecto non habet divortium a vinculo, sed negationem 
tantum protectionis kgis civilis. Hujusmodi instantia et assertio idem reapse 
affirmat ac prcecerlens assertio ; statuit enim aliis verbis objectum illius 
sententise esse civilium effectuum et jurium denegationem. Quare hoec 


instantia et assertio falsa omnino est, ut proecedens affirmatio. Etenim 
legislatures legem divortii ferentes, licet impii viri, non sunt tamen tarn 
in.sipientes ut matrimonium, quod illorum jurium civilium fundamentum est, 
intactum relinquentes, jura tamen ex illo dimanantia denegent ; sed ipsum 
matrimonium dissolventes, potentate civiliter facta convolandi ad alias 
nuptias, protectionem legis consequenlur denegant quoad civilia jura. 
Objectum igitur intrinsecum immediatum illius legis est ipsum matrimonii 
viuculum, unde etiam suum nomen sortitur, et Lex Divortii appellatur. 
Idem ergo est objectum sententise judicis, cum judicis sit non condere 
legem, sed secundum legem, earn particular! -casui applicando judicium 
pronuntiare. Ita sane rem intellexerunt Patres Concilii Prov. Quebecensis. 
Aiunt enim : "Non sine magno animi dolore, seu potius horrore, didice- 
runt Paires hujus Provincialis Synodi, quosdam hujus regionis legislatores 
nuperrime proposuisse, ut constitueretur Curia divortii, cujus munus esset 
DIVORTIUM A VIXCULO pronunciare propter causam adulterii. Ita etiam 
rem intellexit episcopus Sangallensis, qui dubium de hac re proposuit 
Sacrae Congregation!. Nam inquit, quod recentissima ilia Confoederationis 
Helveticae lege ' matrimonia etiam Catholicorum sub certis rationibus valde 
levibus perpetuo dirimi, atque QUOAD VIXCULUM DISSOLVI p-^sunt, iia ut 
ejusmodi conjuges litigantes, post la'am judicum sreculai ium sententiam 
divortii, ad alia matrimonia contrahenda, si voluerint, possint transire." 
Deinde vero idem RK. Sangallensis episcopus ita Dubium scxtum enun- 
ciabat : " Utrum iidem judices Catholici et advocati secundum recentem 
Helvetia: legem MATRIMONII VIXCULUM UT DISSOLVENDUM ptoponere, seu ut 
DISSOLUTUM declarctre tuta conscientia possint, necnon declarare ejusmodi 
conjuges ad aliud matrimonium contrahendum posse transire, etc. Ita pariter 
rein intellexerunt RR. PP. Galliarum epi.-,copi. Etenim epistola recepta 
S. R. et U. I., in qua dicebatur " tolerari posse ut qui magistratus obtinent 
et advocati, causas matrimoniales, quse ad ecclesiasticam periinent potestalem, 

in Gallia agant dummodo nunquam proferant sententiam, 

neque ad proferendam defendant, vel ad earn provocent vel excitent divino 
aut ecclesiastico juri repugnantem " ; dubium propositum est a RR. epis- 
copis : "An recta sit interpretatio per Gallias diffusa, ac etiam typis data, 
juxta quam satisfacit praecitatse conditioni judex, qui licet maliimonium ali- 
quod validum sit coram Ecclesia, ab illo matrimonio vero et constanti anitno 
obstrahit, et applicans legem civilem, pronuntiat locum csse divortio, modo 
solos effectus civiles solumque contractum civilem abrumpere mente intendat, 
eaque sola respiciant termini prolatae sententire ? " Scilicet optima intellige- 
bant RR. PP. legem divortii respicere ipsum matrimonium verum, sententiam 
divortii attingere consequentor objective ipsum vinculum matrimonii. Hinc 
jure meritoque dubitabant de satisfactione illius conditionis nihil agendi 
contra jus divinum vel ecclesiasticum, subjectiva ilia abstractione. Cui 
dubio S. R. et U. I. respondit : Negative. Neque vero aliter respondeve 
poterat ; nam ilia subjectiva abstractio et intentio, ipsa objectiva actione 
retractatur, ilia nempe pronuntiatione sententiae divortii. Atque hinc patet 
quod eadem etiam fuit mens ipsius S. Congregationis. Non alia enim 
ratione negare potuit rectam esse earn interpretationem, nisi quatenus ratum 
firmumque haberet legem divortii, divortiique sententiam objective attingere, 
intrinsece et immediate, ipsum matrimonii vinculum dissolvendum. llanc 


eandem mentem patefecit eadem Sacra Congr. episcopo Sangallensi. ' Etenim 
inquiens, posse tolerari quod Catholici in civili foro agant partes advocati 
et actoris in hac causa divortii, prseter a'ias limitationes hanc addidit, 
dummodo " senlentia hiijus ttibunalis nit Hum a Hum habet effectual, qitain 
separation em prcedictam," nempe quoad thorum et mensam, justis stantibus 
causis. Intellexit ergo Sacra Congr. illam sententiam posse habere de se 
etiam alium effectual, nempe divortium ah ipso vinculo matrimonii, quod 
caeteroquin constat ex toto tenore illius responsionis. Tandem prrcdicta S. 
Inquis. Congr. in epistola ad episcop >s Gallioe inquit, qu<>d judices ita 
animo comparati esse debent "turn circa valorem et nullitatein conjugii, 

turn circa separationem corporum ut nunquam proferant sententiam 

clivino aut ecclesiastico juri repugnantem." Emi ergo Patres aperte 

supponunt objectum illius sententise non aliud in casu esse, quam turn 
ipsum valorem et nullitatem conjugii, turn corporum separationem. 

12. Neque objiciatur intrinsecam illiceitatem non posse saltern deduct ex 
decisionibus Sncrae G.<ngregationis, cum hsec utatur particula disjunctiva 
aut, inquiens illam sententiam esse " Divino aut ecclesiastico juri repug- 
nantem." Respondetur i. quam vis in epistola ad episcopos Gallhe utatur 
S. C. particula disjunctiva, in rfisponsione tamen ad episcopos Suthevarien- 
sem 2 et Sangalliensem utitur particula copulativa et, inquiens quod nihil 
iu casu fieri debet, " quod a principiis juris naturalis ET ecclesiastic! de- 
flectat." Respondetur 2. rationem adfuisse, cur S. C. usa fuerit in epistola ad 
episcopos Gallic particula disjunctiva. Agebatur enim non de simplici objecto 
illius sententiae, sed de objecto complexo. Agebatur non tantum de divortio 
a vinculo, verum etiam de divortio a cohabitatione et thoro ; quare bene ad- 
debatur cum particula disjunctiva, quod senteniia poterat esse repugnans 
divino ant ecclesiastico juri. Hie est totus textus : " dummodo ita animo 
comparati sint turn circa valorem el nnllitatem conjugii, turn circa srpara- 
tionem corporum, de quibus causis judicare coguntur, ut nunquam proferant 

sententiam divino aut ecclesiastico juri repugnantem." Sententia 

contra valorem et vinculum matrimonii est semper repugnans divino 
juri : divino quippe jure illud vinculum est constitution. Sententia vero 
circa separationem corporum aliquando juri tantum ecclesiastico repug- 
nare potest, cum plura hac in re constituta sint jure tantum positive 
Ecclesire. Neque Ecciesia tolcrans, quod judices laici pertractent causas 
matrimoniales potestatem etiam ipsis facit posthabendi omnino ecciesiasticas 
leges. In responsione e contra ad episcopum Suthwariensem et Sangal- 
lensem agebatur de simplici objecto illius sententise, de solutione vinculi, et 
tune Sacra Congr. copulaiivam adhibet particulam. Non solum enim divino 
jure sed jure etiam ecclesiastico illud vinculum constat. Totus textus 
sequentis est tenoris : " Utrum advocatus Catholicus possit defendere 
causas partis convents: contra actorem, vinculi solutionem exquirentem ? 
Responsum fuit : " Dummodo episcopo constet de probitate advocati, et 
dummodo advocatus nihil agat, q nod a principiis juris naturalis et ecclesias- 
tici deflectat, posse tolerari." Epistola autem, quoe contra hanc conclusio- 

1 See the Dubia proposed by the bishop of St. Gall with the replies 
thereto of the Sacred Congregation, VOL. V., p. 74, seq. 

2 See vol. v. p. 75. 


nem etiam affertur, ad Nuntium S. Sedis in Bclgio et ad ministrum 
negotiorum exterorum in eodem Belgio, nihil evincit. Ilia enim epistola 
faclitni dumtaxat cnuntiat, nihil vero habet de ipsa rei dcctrina. 

13. Postremo objicitur : quia secus judex bonus in magnum societatis detri- 
mentum deberet officium deserere, et maius judex ipsi certe substitueretur ; 
quia, si Catholicus judex hanc non pronuntiet senlentiam, alius impius judex 
illam feret ; quia ita nunc agunt plures Catholici judices. Respondetur ad 
primum : Detrimentum societatis non est, quod judices, ut publicain justitiam 
et honestatem defendant, proprio etiam officio cedant. Detrimentum societatis 
non est, quod inter tot prava exempla eorum, qui societatem regunt et 
gubernant, pauci sint, qui cam bono et laudabili exemplo decorent cum 
tanto proprio incommode, aliis quterentibus qua; sua sunt, ipsi vero quse 
Jesu Christi. Detrimentum societatis est, quod ipsorum honestimorum 
judicum co-operatione divortiis repleantur civitates, et dissolvantur familire. 
Respondetur ad secundum : Quod alii male agant, ratio profecto non est, 
cur idem malum et nos faciamus. Nostro potius exemplo, nostns princip is 
et doctrinis aliorum etiam malum impediamus. Respondetur ad tertium : 
Quod plures etiam Catholici judices ita agant in bona fide, hoc sane non 
probat quod recte objective agant. Et quoad ipsos, recta prudentia, et 
majus malum vitandum, in determinatis locorum et temporum circumstantiis, 
consulere possunt, saltern ad tempus, silentium. I lures e contrario et longe 
plures rem uti illicitam, et ipso naturali jure iliicitam habent. Creterum 
non sreculares judices theologos, sed theologi sreculares judices docere 
debent. quid in hac re licitum, quid illicuum sit. 

Regarding his presentation of the thesis in i, we must say 
at the outset that Fr. Bucceroni is either unconsciously dis- 
honest, or that he is treating a subject entirely different from 
the one commonly understood. " De sententia divoitii quoad 
vinculum matrimonii a judice laico ferenda, quaeritur utrum sit 
intrinsece illicita?" Of course it is. It is both illicit and in- 
valid, whether pronounced by the ecclesiastical or secular court. 
That is not the question at all. The only thing ever con- 
tended for by Lemkuhl, Sabbetti, Marc, Grandclaude, etc., is 
that a judge, rather than resign his office, and, given certain 
conditions, may pronounce sentence of divorce according to the 
law. Contrary to what Fr. Buccceroni seems to impute to these 
theologians, all require, as a very first condition, that the sen- 
tence shall not be directed against the vinculum matrimonii. Sen- 
tence against the vinculum would be as impious as it would be 
ineffective. It would be an act in se evil, necessarily, essen- 
tially bad, and could be justified on no grounds. Non licet 
facere malum ut eveniat bonum. And further, these theolo- 
gians require that the Catholic judge, in order to avoid any 
misrepresentation or misunderstanding of his act, shall openly 
profess the absolute indissolubility of the marriage bond, his 


own incompetence and the incompetence of all earthly powers to 
undo the marriage tie. Besides this, he must in like manner 
acknowledge that to ecclesiastical tribunals exclusively it belongs 
to hear and decide 2,11 matrimonial causes. As against these 
theologians, where is the point of Fr. Bucceroni's thesis De 
sententii divortii quoad vincuhim a .. judice laico ferenda. Utique 
talis sententia est intrinsece illicita, est impia. So say all, as 
well a^ Fr. Bucceroni. But, with the Sacred Congregation of 
the Holy Office, those theologians maintain, as against the pro- 
fessor, that, owing to the grave state of affairs in France, it 
may be tolerated for Catholic judges, rather than throw up 
their position, to render decisions in accordance with the French 
divorce law, provided they openly, publicly, profess the absolute 
indissolubiiity of the marriage tie, etc. (Supra, p. 209.) An act 
which circumstances may render justifiable, not immoral, an act 
which under certain circumstances would not be bad, and the 
performance of which by devout Christians may be tolerated, that 
act cannot be necessarily evil in itself, and sinful. Were it so, 
tolerari non posset. Non licet facere malum ut eveniat bonum. 
But the act of the judge, in pronouncing sentence of divorce, 
not as Fr. Bucceroni has it, sentence of divorce quoad vincuhim, 
but sentence of divorce as contemplated by unchristian legisla- 
tion, which recognizes no other bond in marriage but those 
thrown round the contract by that same legislation, that act, 
says the Holy Office, is not necessarily immoral, is one that 
may be tolerated and consequently rendered excusable under 
certain circumstances, and therefore is not intrinsece illicita. In 
se and apart from the necessities of the judge and of society, 
the act, as tending to immorality and the obliteration of the 
divine law in men's minds, is never justifiable. This is freely 
granted. But on the other side it must be as freely granted 
that the judge's sentence is not an act necessarily intrinsically 
evil in itself, else it could never be tolerated. Until Fr. Buc- 
ceroni can do away with that tolerari posse in the answer of 
the Holy Office, June 1885, it will be impossible for him to 
prove that every such sentence pronounced by a lay judge is 
necessarily and intrinsically evil. What is intrinsically evil can 
never be permitted. Lay judges are expressly permitted to pro- 
nounce legal divorce under certain circumstances. Therefore such 
sentence is not intrinsically illicit ; and the only question that can 
be raised is as to the sufficiency of the causes to justify ih> act. 


Besides, as we showed in the previous paper, this act of the 
judge divorcing persons quoad mensam et thorum, is in se only 
one that was always recognized by the Church and practised in 
ecclesiastical tribunals. But, it will be said, this act of the 
modern judge embraces the expressed permission of the law 
granted the divorced parties to marry again. The judge by his 
sentence grants this permission efficaciter. Now we may brush 
this objection aside at once. Neither the law nor the judge 
necessarily grants any such permission. Neither the law nor the 
judge necessarily recognizes the freedom of the divorced parties 
from the impedimentum ligaminis. But just as legislation must 
often permit acknowledged evils to go unpunished brothels for 
instance in order to ward off greater and more direful evils, so 
legislation permits to go unpunished the adulterous unions of 
persons who obtained legal divorce. This immunity from penalty 
or countenance given the adulterous, cohabitation, does not 
necessarily suppose that legislator, or judge, or any person in the 
State recognizes the validity of the second marriage. If the 
parties avail themselves of the legal immunity secured by the 
sentence to live openly in sin, to their own perverse will, not 
to the law nor to the judge is this to be attributed. Nam 
"cum tu praestas actionem per se indifferentem, scilicet, quae 
p;>test esse bona vel mala, non teneris nisi ex charitate ab ilia 
abstinere, ne alter ea abutatur ad peccandtim ; quando autem 
alias grave damnum metuis, licite permittere potes peccatum 
alterius : nam ex una parte charitas te non obligat cum gravi 
damno peccatum ejus avertere ; et ex altera, malitia alterius nequit 
mutare naturam tuaa actionis ita ut de indifferenti evadat intiin- 
sece mala." Liguori, II. 66. That is precisely the case of the 
judge whose sentence quoad separationem is of its nature a 
thing indifferent. That sentence exerts no direct influence on the 
subsequent concubinage. '' Actio judicis," writes the lamented 
Father Marc, " non est inlrinsece mala, et per se nihil aliud est, 
quam matrimonium privare illis commodis, quas per legem ei 
collata fuerunt." 

The Italian moralist, Amelius Berardi, whose recent treatises 
on Moral, especially his Examen Confessarii et Parochi, have 
been so favorably received, writes in relation to the discussion in 
France : Assentior illi sententiae quae docet, talibus in adjunctis, 
judices tollere posse effectus civiles, seu ea solvere quae Status 
prajcise ligavit, salvis manentibus divinis et naturalibus vinculis." 


Berardi would not so express himself if he were of opinion 
that the sentence is intrinsically, always, necessarily, unlawful. But, 
as we remarked before, it will be noticed that Berardi and 
Marc are speaking of one thing, Father Bucceroni of another. 
The latter seems unable to conceive of a sentence of divorce 
that will not mean divorce a vinculo : while Marc and Berardi 
limit expressly the phrase "legal divorce" to the legal, tem- 
poral ties created by the law between married persons. Maic 
and Berardi would pronounce the sentence of divorce that Fr. 
Bucceroni has in mind, divorce quoad vinculum as intrinsically 
unlawful. In that first paragraph of his essay, then, the Roman 
professor merely muddles matters by limiting his thoughts, as no 
one else does, to diwriium a vinculo. Sentence of divorce, as 
Father Bucceroni understands it, all theologians repudiate as 
impious and intrinsically illicit : not so the sentence, called of 
divorce, pronounced no\v-a-days by the Catholic judges in our 
civil courts. 

Omitting for brevity's sake the testimony of other theologians, 
who maintain that sentence of legal divorce is not necessarily 
unlawful, we need quote only Lehmkuhl. If not the very 
first of living moralists, Lehmkuhl's name stands among the very 
best and most reliable. No theologian will carelessly throw 
aside an opinion clearly taught by the German professor. Now 
Father Lehmkuhl, S. J., teaches, contrary to Father Bucceroni, 
S. J., that the sentence of divorce pronounced by Catholic judges 
in our courts of law is not intrinsically illicit. Award all the 
weight of authority you choose to the ipse dixi of Bucceroni, 
Lehmkuhl's opinion, as mere authority, would far and far out- 
weigh Bucceroni's in any theological school in the world. Buc- 
ceroni says the sentence of divorce is intrinsically illicit ; 
Lehmkuhl says it is not. However, to reconcile the teachings 
of the two renowned professors, or, at least, to do away with 
the seeming direct contradiction between them, it is only 
necessary to call to mind that they are speaking of different 
things. Divortium for Bucceroni means only divortium a vinculo. 
Hear Lehmkuhl: After stating the teaching of His Holiness 
Leo XIII., set forth in the Constitution Arcanum, (THE PASTOR, 
VOL. V., p. 194,) that marriage, being of its very nature a res 
sacra, cannot be numbered among the things which it belongs 
to the civil power to regulate, but exclusively to the ecclesiastical, 
to the Church, " quae rerum sacrarum sola habet magisterium," 


the learned professor adds: "Sed, proh dolor! civilis auctori- 
tas in tarn multis locis jura ecclesiastica hac in re usurpavit ! 
Quapropter non raro accidif, ut saeculari judici afferatur causa 
matrimonialis dijudicanda, quae tendat in sententiam divortii 
tandem pronuntiandam. Eos, qui ita recurrunt ad foium civile, 
nisi forte post habitam sententiam ecclesiasticam solas res tem- 
porales componendas curant, graviter peccare non est dubium. 
Idem dicendum est de judice, qui causas per se ad ecclesiam 
spectantes, quasi suo jure vel sine necessitate tractat. Num etiam, 
si ex necessitate, quia nempe nisi velit munere suo se abdicare 
eas res tractare cogitur ? Respondeo id pendere a MODO quo 
agat et pronuntiat sententiam. Si enim ita pronuntiare potest 
et pronuntiat, ut dare paleat idque litigantibus innotescat, se nul/a- 
tenus tangere neque tangere velle vinculum coram Deo sed solummodo 
civilium jurium protectionem vel cessationem secundum leges se 
determinare: non nego, id tx adeo gravi causa judici licere. ' 
Videlicit tune pronuntiat, in hisce circumstantiis hoc et illud 
matrimonium a civili auctoritate tanquam non existens considerari. 
Quod a legibus statui, iniquum quidem est 2 et malorum 
gravium causa ; quse tamen quum impediri a judice nequeant, 
permitti ab eo, peccatum non est. s Si quando autem ejusmodi 
leges ex odio Ecclesia3 feruntur et sustinentur, atque illud 
odium flagrans effertur, quoelibet co-operatio et applicatio illicita 
evade re potest." 

It is believed on good grounds that the motive of some, at 
least, of the champions of the divorce law passed in France in 
1884, was precisely odium Eccltsice. But even if this had been 
the direct object of every member of the majority who voted 
the law, their motive or intention is no part of the law. In 
carrying out the law the Catholic judge is not giving effect to the 
intentions of those haters of Christianity. This is evident .to all 

1 If the sentence were intrinsically illicit, it could never be lawful 
quacumque ex causa. This is a truism of Moral that nobody denies. 
Hence Lehmkuhl plainly asserts that the sentence of divorce is not intrin- 
sically, necessarily, immoral or unlawful. 

2 For, the legislators are bound to respect the existing marriage, are not 
free to disown it, or withdraw therefrom the protection of the laws. They 
should uphold for the married pair the natural rights and consequences 
that naturally and necessarily flow from the fact of marriage. 

3 It would be a sin, were the sentence, as Frt Bucceroni claims, " intrin- 
sece illicita." Lehmkuhl manifestly holds that the sentence is not intrinsi- 
cally unlawful or sinful. 


when the judge is known to be a sincere believer in the teachings 
of the Catholic Church, and particularly in the dogma of the 
indissolubility of Christian marriage, and that his sentence is 
directed only to the withdrawal from the litigants of those mutual 
rights and duties wherewith the law invested them as married 


persons, not to the vinculum matrimonii. This known motive, 
however, of the majority (possibly) of the French chambers, 
odium Ecclesise, odium religionis Christianas, makes it more 
imperative in France than elsewhere for the Catholic judge to 
make open profession of his faith, and thereby dissociate him- 
self entirely from the crowd who called this divorce law into 
being as a weapon to be used against Christianity and Christian 
marriage. In other countries divorce laws were passed, but no- 
where, save (possibly) in France, were these laws enacted in 
odium Ecclesiae et religionis. This makes the position of the 
French judges, vis-a-vis the French divorce law, exceptional, and 
forbids us, as Lehmkuhl says in his fourth edition, to apply to 
oiher countries the regulations in this matter at present in force 
in France. Hence the Belgian Nuncio, in reply to the enquiries 
of the minister of Foreign Affairs as to the true meaning of 
that decree of May, 1886 (THE PASTOR, IV., 368) replied, 
September 14, 1886: "Prince: Your Excellency called my 
attention some days ago to a decree of the Holy Office, dated 
the 27th of May, in which answer is made to certain questions 
proposed by the French bishops regarding the law of divorce 
recently re-established in France. 

"You remarked that this decree, published in the Belgian papers, 
had given rise to discussions in the press and created appre- 
hensions which it would be well to set at rest by a declaration 
made by the competent authority. I hastened to bring your 
remarks to the notice of the Holy See, at the same time 
earnestly requesting the Cardinal Secretary of State to procure 
such a decision from the Holy Father as would enlighten men's 
minds on the question at issue." 

"As the result of my request His Eminence has just informed 
me that, in obedience to the orders of His Holiness, the Holy 
Office has declared that the decree of May 24, 1886, does not 
concern Belgium, and that consequently no modification of the 
practice existing in Belgium regarding the carrying out of the 
divorce law has been made." (THE PASTOR, V., 190). 

Now Catholic judges in Belgium, under the eyes of the Nuncio 


and of the Belgian prelates, do pronounce and have been pro- 
nouncing sentence of legal divorce for the last hundred years. 
These men approach the sacraments and are many of them 
leaders in the Catholic paity. Does it not seem absurd to talk 
of such men as habitually committing acts intrinsically evil ? We 
strain no point in claiming that this official decision of the 
Holy Office was equivalent to a tokrari posse, under the circum- 
stances, of the Belgian practice. Sententia ergo divortii a judice 
laico lata non est intrinsece mala. 

It will be only necessary to recall the teaching of Liguori 
Lib. II., art. 3, nn. 59 80, An liceat alterius peaato materialiter 
cc-operari > to be convinced that, under certain conditions, 
such co-operation would be sinless ; and, second, to see that, 
the greater the crime and the more direct and immediate the 
co-operation, the greater is required to be the cause to justify 
the co-operation, There, also, it may be seen that, other things 
being equal, the co-operation will be the more easily excused 
when, if refused, the sin would not be thereby prevented, as 
there would be others ready to perform the service. Against all 
these authorities and indeed universal practice we may well say 
tolerated and recognized practice we cannot understand how F. 
Bucceroni can contend that it is always and everywhere an act 
intrinsically evil for a judge to pronounce sentence of legal 
divorce. He is not limiting the discussion to France, be it 
remembered, but speaks indiscriminately of legal divorce in all 
countries. In conclusion we may add to the authorities already 
quoted the Instruction of the Holy Office to the Bishop of New 
Orleans (THE PASTOR, Vol. IV. p. 203) in which their Eminences 
counsel the procuring of a divorce not a vinculo, of course, but 
in civilibus. If the granting of such a divorce were an act 
intrinsically illicit, the Holy Office never could have advised its 

F. B. in his second writes : " Si qua lex est, quae contineat 
aliquid contra jus naturale et divinum, etc/' This is only 
befogging the question. Lex naturalis prohibitwa obligat semper 
et pro semper. But lex naturalis affirmativa non obligat pro 
certis casibus gravis difficultatis. Malitia intrinseca is found only 
in the violation of the natural law, as prohibitive. That act is 
forbidden in se et propter se. (Lehmkuhl I., 190) Malitia 
extrinseca is found in the violation of the natural law as affirmative, 
v. g., succoring a neighbor in distress. But this law does not 


bind cum gravi* detrimento proprio : " non obligat pro certis 
casibus gravis difficultatis." (Biner, Part I., c. ii). And as to the 
divine law, let the Sacred Congregation answer and assure F. Buccer- 
oni that even the divine laws do not always bind to their fulfilment : 
" Etiamsi supponatur legem obligare in conscientia, inde tamen 
non sequeretur ejus violationem in omnibus circumstantiis secum 
ferre theologicam culpam ; leges enim humanse, ordinarie 
loquendo, non obligant cum gravi damno ad sui observantiam. 
Id locum habet in ipsis divinis legibus. Ita observantia Sabbati, 
in veteri lege, et abstinentia a sanguine, non obligabant cum 
peiiculo vitae ; (D. Thorn, i. 2. q. 100, a. 8, Suarez, L. III. 
De Leg.,} et in nova lege non obligat cum eodem periculo lex 
de integritite confessionis, de suscipiendis sacramentis, etc." 
Instr. S. C. de P. F. pro missionariis Sinen., 23. Junii, 1830. 

" Etenim, si qua lex est, quce aliquid contineat contra jus 
naturale et divinum, lex profecto est divortii quoad ipsum 
mairimonii vinculum." There was never such a law passed 
in any country. It looks as if Fr. Bucceroni were setting 
up a man of straw for the pleasure of knocking him down 
again. Not only no country ever made such a law, but 
not even the most hairbrained theologian ever said such a 
sentence was licit. None ever held that it would not be, as 
Fr. Bucceroni contends, (against nobody,) intrinsically illicit. 
Sententia quoad ipsum vinculum was never in question. To bring 
it in now into a question which was fairly debatable tends 
only to confusion. When we say with Lehmkuhl, Sabbetti, 
Marc, and the rest, that Catholic judges under certain circum- 
stances would be justified in pronouncing sentence of divorce 
according to the law, we are careful to explain that the sen- 
tence does not, and is not intended to touch the vinculum 
matrimonii. In fact, the law which is applied does not recog- 
nize the existence of any such vinculum. Apply the whole law, 
then, to any particular case, and there is no sententia quoad 
vinculum. Fr. Bucceroni might well have spared himself the 
trouble of proving what nobody denies, that a sentence of 
divorce quoad vinculum matrimonii is intrinsically illicit. 

But why lose time talking of natural or divine law as regards 
this case. The sentence of the judge, when that sentence is 
expressly limited, as we limit it, to the civil effects of marriage, 
is neither against the natural nor the divine law ; and the judge, 
"coactus," menaced with the loss of his position if he do not 


act, and conscious of the evils that would jesult to society 
from the resignation of all conscientious magistrates, has cause 
sufficient to hold himself permissively to any consequent sin of 
the parties divorced. (See extract from the very careful Professor 
Santi, supra, p. 217). It will, of course, never be necessary for the 
Catholic judge on the bench to remind the parties to a divorce 
suit that his sentence does not extend past the civil effects of 
marriage. This can be done by the parish priest, and easily ; 
for in the hypothesis the judge openly professes his faith, and 
consequently his belief in the indissolubility of marriage. 

Father B's third paragraph is almost a repetition of the first 
and second. " Iritrinsece illicitum est sententiam ferre contra jus 
naturale et divinum." Transeat, in sensu exposito. "Atqui 
sententia divortii contra vinculum matrimonii, etc." Esto : negatur 
prorsus consequentia, nempe, sententiam, quam ferunt Catholic! 
nostri judices de cwilibus tantum, non de vinculo, esse illicitam. 

In the fourth of the thirteen paragraphs into which Fr. 
Bucceroni's essay is divided he says: "Intrinsece illicita et 
iniqua est ipsa lex divortii." Who said it was otherwise ? 
Secular courts should not treat matrimonial causes. But we 
must be on our guard with the learned professor and not 
allow him to lead us extra rem. What he means by the " lex 
divortii/' we do not mean. He means a lex of the secular 
power, the immediate object of which is to sunder the vinculum 
matiimonii. The lex of the secular power has no such object. 
If it had, the lex would be intrinsece mala beyond a doubt. 
The modern lex divortii means only this, that for certain 
specified reasons a married person can claim and obtain 
complete freedom from those obligations of married life which 
have been imposed on married persons by the law. It is 
hardly correct to say that there is anything intrinsically evil 
in this. The Church will herself grant the very same. There 
is an after-consequence of the civil divorce, which is external 
to the law itself, permitting the divorced person to assume the 
legal duties of married life again, either towards the partner 
divorced or another. But this consequence is accidental and not 
essentially a part of the law of divorce. It should not be con- 
founded with the law, nor . spoken of as an integral portion of 
the law. And after the divorce "Si conjux alter ad alias 
nuptias de facto convolet, ipsa lege ipsuque judicis sententia in 
suo adulterio protegitur et communitur." 7. No, not judicis 


sententia, but only lege. The judicis sententia is a thing of 
the past, completed, done with. It may be a sine-qua-non 
of the action of the law. But the sentence itself does not 
possess any continuity, nor has it any direct action on the 
parties divorced or their doings after it has been pronounced. 
Of its 'nature the sentence does not induce, nor tend to induce 
the divorced parties to contract an adulterous union. The 
sentence stops with leaving them free of each other in civilibus. 
It very often becomes the duty of manied persons to seek this 
freedom. There may be no other means of saving a wife from 
shame, children from moral ruin. - To say that this freedom, 
rendered married persons by sentence of the court, is a quid 
mali in se were absurd. In se it is a thing that the most 
scrupulous Catholic judge can grant. ' The circumstance that 
a thing good or indifferent in itself may be abused does not 
alter its nature. The fact that the liberty in civilibus restored 
by sentence of the court to manied persons may be abused 
does not make that liberty bad in itself, 

The fifth paragraph is simply a false assertion. Fr. Bucceroni 
had not seen the Instruction sent the archbishop of Paris in 
November, 1886, and he misinterprets, as we have easily shown, 
those of June, 1885, and May, 1886. 

His sixth paragraph is not different in reality from the first. 
It involves the same unwarranted assertion that theologians who 
maintain that the sententia divortii, sub dcbitis conditionibus lata non 
est intrinsece illicita, understand by the words "sententia divortii" 
sentence of divorce a vinculo. They do not. As they explain 
their meaning it is evident that "lex divortii," spectata prae 
suo objecto immediate ct legali scu fine intrinseco," the withdrawal 
of the guarantee by the State of certain civil rights, "non est 
intrinsece illicita. " This guarantee may be withdrawn for various 
civil offenses and crimes. " Lex divortii spectata prce aliquo 
fine remoto, indirecto et extrinseco, in lege minime expresso, est 
intrinsece illicita conceditur." Granddaudc. That finis legi extrin- 
secus may have been the legalization of adultery on the part of 
the promoters of the law. But of this no judge need take any 
account. The intentions of those worthies who voted for the law 
are not a part of the law. 

1 It is to be distinctly understood that, unless under durance, the secular 
judge is always doing wrong when dealing with, matrimonial causes. His 
act may be excusable /';/ se, it is never right. 


As to paiagraph 7, those who look through Liguori, Lib. II. 
nn. 59-80, or through the pages of any of our accepted authori- 
ties in Moral, will see that, to permit even passively the sin of 
another, a cause bearing some proportion to the gravity of the 
sin is required to justify the permission. Regarding the suffi- 
ciency of this cause in a particular case, there may be a 
difference of opinion. Contrary to the great majority of theo- 
logians and confessors, to say nothing of the decisions of the 
Holy Office, Bucceroni declares that the retention of their places 
on the bench is not cause sufficient to justify Catholic judges 
in any country in pronouncing sentence of divorce. To this we 
can only reply, Pater reverendus in suo sensu abundet. He will 
find few to coincide with him. He writes sententia natura sua 
est formalis est tfficax efficax, for what? Does the judge make 
the parties commit adultery ? Does the sentence grant them any 
nubendi facultatem ? No, emphatically no, to both. By his sentence 
he permits, at most, what he cannot prevent in any case, that 
the parties divorced may afterwards live in concubinage with 
immunity from the legal penalties attached to the crime. As to 
the argument, "Si judex facultatem faceret impiis hominibus 
occidendi clericos, spoliandi ecclesias, etc./' negatur prorsus 
paritas. Any law to such an effect, as any law decreeing divorce 
quoad vinculum, would be intrinsically evil ; and the judge's 
sentence, carrying this law into effect in particular cases, would 
be likewise intrinsically evil, and under no circumstances 

But it is really impossible to argue with F. Bucceroni as 
long as he persists in attaching a meaning to lex divortii, 
sententia divortii, which no one else does, and in fathering upon, 
men like Lehmkuhl, Sabetti, Marc, F. Timothy, the Franciscan, 
Grandclaude, and a thousand others, arguments on which they never 
founded their opinion. Thus, in 8, he writes: " Neque instare 
valet dicendo, quod judex potest privatim monere partes de jure 
naturali cl divino ; imo quod in Comidcrandis praeviis sententioe, 
optime asserere potest catholicam de hac re doctrinam." No one 
ever used any such argument. A preliminary absolutely required 
in every case to justify the Catholic judge is, that not only the 
parties seeking the divorce, but the general public, shall 
thoroughly comprehend that his sentence is aimed neither at the 
natural nor at the divine law, that it is not directed against 
the vinculum matrimonii, but merely against those claims which 


the civil law confers on husband and wife as against each other. 
What theologians do say is, that it would be an evil day for 
society, were all the Christian judges to be compelled to resign. 
At present the Catholic judge may have many a chance, by a 
judicious use of his authority, of his power to defer final 
sentence, etc., of bringing about a reconciliation between the 
parties. These chances, whatever they be, would disappear with 
the Catholic judge. 

What answer, now, can be made to F. Bucceroni writing of 
the supposed private admonition of the judge de jure naturali et 
divino : "In hujusmodi judice habetur vera contradictio practica. 
Nam sancit uti judex sua sententia illud ipsum quod uti chris- 
tianus fidelis affirmat esse contra jus naturale et divinum." This 
persistency in refusing to see in the judge's sentence anything 
but a pronouncement that the vinculum matrimonii is sundered 
reduces all argumentation with the learned Father to the 
child's "You did; I didn't." The judge, by his sentence, does 
not sanction nor pretend to sanction "quod uti christianus 
fidelis affirmat esse contra jus naturale et divinum." For cause 
sufficient the sacred canons allow precisely the very divorce 
which the judge sanctions by his sentence. And such divorce was 
always granted by the ecclesiastical ccurts. The after consequences 
of the liberty acquired have no necessary connection with the 
sentence. The divorces obtained of old from the ecclesiastical 
courts were liable to be abused, as are the divorces now ob- 
tained from the civil courts. 

In 9 F. Bucceroni writes of arguments very silly that he 
credits to his opponents: '' Ista ratiocinatio, si probet, probat 
etiam ipsam legem divortii non esse intrinsece malam." Well, 
objectively regarded, it can be said that the divorce law is not 
necessarily evil. The sacred canons (Deer. Lib. IV., Tit. 19) allow 
divorce for several reasons. A state law of divorce could limit 
the grounds on which the separation could be obtained to the 
very ones set forth in the Decretals. All that would be bad in such 
a law, would be found, not in the law itself, but only in this, that 
the case would come before the wrong court. The argument, 
therefore, based on the supposition that any statute having in 
view the separation of man and wife, and rendering them free 
of each other in civilibus, must be intrinsically evil, is no argument. 
Yet such is F. Buccercni's argument in 9. If he be allowed 
to make what suppositions he please, he can prove anything. 


Every law of divorce must be in all its extension, in every part, 
intrinsically evil. Therefore the judge's sentence, making applica- 
tion of such law, is intrinsically evil. Are the divorce laws of 
the Decretals intrinsically evil? Wild postulates like this crowd 
each other in the pages of this too hastily written essay. 

Nor does the learned professor show to any better advantage 
in 10: "Alii dicunt quod sententia non est intrinsece mala 
si consideretur ejus objectum. Enimvero objectum illius 
sententiae non est vinculum matrimonii dissolvendum, vel facultas 
civilis convolandi ad alias nuptias, sed dumtaxat commoda et 
effectus civile?, quos ilia sententia tollit, seu quibus ilia sententia 
matrimonium aliunde indissolubile privat, civilium jurium cessa- 
tionem definiendo. Verum hoc falso penitus asseritur. Objectum 
intrinse&um immediatum sententias judicis est ip?um objectum 
intrinsecum immediatum legis." Here we are again at the child's 
argument: "You did; I didn't." All the theologians who 
maintain that in a given contingency our Catholic judges can 
lawfully give sentence of divorce, maintain that any sentence, the 
object of which would be the vinculum matrimonii, would be 
necessarily and intrinsically illicit, immoral, and could be justi- 
fied on no grounds whatsoever. They go further in insisting 
that the parties seeking the divorce, as well as the public, 
must be fully aware that the sentence does not reach nor intend 
to touch the vinculum. Then, even the objtcium intrinsecum imme- 
diatum ipsius legis is not the vinculum. The State legislation 
does not recognize the vinculum's existence. Consequently State 
laws are no more directed against the vinculum than they are 
against some unknown comet. 

Paragraph n differs little from 10. Father Bucceroni 
insists that the intrinsic object of the law is ipsum matrimonii 
vinculum. The framers of the law may have had in view the 
sundering of the vinculum. But that is not expressed in the 
law, and the Catholic judge is not bound to take any heed of 
the impious intention. 

The arguments in the two last paragraphs, 12 and 13, we 
have already forestalled. The judge's sentence must never be 
"divino aut ecclesiastico juri repugnans," says the Holy Office. 
Certainly, never. Were his sentence levelled at the vinculum, 
it would be divino juri rcpugnans. Were the secular judge to 
try these matrimonial causes as causes properly belonging to his 
court, and give sentence accordingly, his sentence would be 


ecclesiastico juri repugnans. He does neither. The grave 
detrimentum that a resignation would cause, and the compulsion 
brought to bear on him by the government to deal with these 
cases, make the judge's act justifiable. 

We doubt whether there be another theologian of any name 
who would treat the response to the Belgian government on such 
a practical, actual, serious matter with the indifference that Fr. 
Bucceroni does. " Factum dumtaxat enuntiat, nihil vero habet 
de ipsa doctrina." The Holy See was responding formally to a 
formal question : Have Catholic judges in Belgium any reason 
to entertain misgivings in regard to the morality of their action 
in pronouncing sentence of divorce, because of that decree of 
the Holy Office, May, 1886 ? The answer is : That decree 
implied no necessity of altering anything in the Belgian practice. 

To conclude, Fr. Bucceroni, though in Rome, did not see a 
copy of the latest and most explicit instructions of the Holy 
Office on the question at issue, that instruction which was 
transmitted in November, 1886, to the Archbishop of Paris. 
Had Fr. Bucceroni seen the document, he would never have 
published this essay. 

LEHMKUHL'S FOURTH EDITION. The author has not altered his 
opinion. The Nouvelle Rtvue says : " Le R. P. Lehmkuhl 
croit toujours, comme il a dit dans sa troisieme edition, qu'en 
soi, le prononce du divorce par le juge civil n'est pas intrin- 
sequement mauvais, et qu'il peut etre licite sous certaines 
conditions : mais il ajoute cette fois que le D6cret du 27 Mai 
1'a declare illicite pour la France, dans les circonstances actu- 
elles." In this Fr. Lehmkuhl was mistaken. He had not time 
to study the decisions of May 27 before publishing, nor had he 
even heard, it seems, of the subsequent instructions sent the 
following November (1886), to the archbishop of Paris. 
" Caeterum in dubio, qualis co-operatio licita sit vel illicita, S. 
Sedis est statuere : quoe sicut res sunt in Gallia, divortii sen- 
tentiam non licere dixit, (S. O. 27 Maji, 1886) : ad Belgium 
hanc decisionem extendi negavit." Lehmkuhl. 

Neither did Marc alter his opinion, he merely inserted the 
new decrees, and said his text, if need be, should be corrected to 
conform to those new decrees. His text needed no alteration. 


There are so many blunders in Doctor Planchard's article 
in the Nouvelle Revue, Sec. Serie, Tom. vi., p. 473, that 
it would require an octavo volume to refute them one by one, 
and give the correct explanation and import of those decisions 
ot the Holy See regarding divorce. However, those who 
peruse the preceding pages with attention will find the key to 
the solution of nearly every difficulty. 

Mulier, vi sententise separata a marito quoad torum, vellet ad 
vitam sustinendam quoddam publicum munus suscipere. Sed 
gubernium id non sinit nisi petat divortium. Ipsa petere vellet, 
sed in sua intentione, semper salvo ligamine. Parochus, qui est 
et illius confessarius, petit num admitti possit ad sacramenta, et 
lumen seu consilium circa reliqua, ut infra. 

R. S. Pcen. Mulieri pcenitenti, in casu, nihil aliud esse consu- 
lendum,, nisi ut a petendo divortio sub gravi se abstineat. S. 
Pcenit. 5 Januarii, 1877. 

This was a fictitious case. The government, qua tale, never 
demanded such a thing. Some petty underling, possibly, who 
was living with some other man's divorced wife, wanted to make 
divorce respectable, and, in odium religionis, was driving the poor 
woman to that course. To seek a divorce under the circum- 
stances would be an act in se malus. 




After outlining the action of the Catholic Church from the 
earliest days down to the part taken by the Holy See against 
the slave trade in the Congress of Vienna, and the Apostolic 
letters against it issued by Gregory XVI., In Supremo Apostolalus 
fastigio, dated Dec. 3, 1837, the Pontiff addresses himself directly 
to the bishops of the empire as follows : 

Jamque in vobis, Venerabile^ Fratres, cogitntio et litterse Nostrse gcstiunt 
conquiescere, ut vobis iterum significemus iterumque vobiscum socicmus 
singulare quod capimus, gaudium, ob ea qute isto in Imperio publice inita 
sunt de servitute consilia. Siquidem per leges quum provisum cautumque 
sit, ut, quotquot sunt adhuc de conditione servili, in ordinem et jura libero- 
rum debeant admitti, id Nobis ut bonum et faustum et salutare per se 
videtur, sic etiam spem firmat fovetque ad auctus rei civilis reique sacrae 


in futurum loetandos. Ira Brasilia nomen Imperil apud humanissimas quas- 
que gentes erit merito in commemoratione et in laudibus, nomcnque simul 
florebit Imperatoris augusti; cujus ea fertur praeclara vox, nihil se ' habere 
optatius, quam ut omi.e in finibus suis servitulis vestigium celeriter delea- 
tur. At vero. dum ea ipsa legum jussa perficiuntur, incumbite alacres, omni 
ope rogamus, et operam providentissime date prassenti rei, quam difficultates 
impediunt profecto non leves. (Jmnino per vos efficienclum, ut domini et 
servi optimis inter se animis congruant opiimaque fide, neu quidquam de 
dementia aut de justitia decedant, sed, qurecumque transigenda sunt, otnnia 
legitime, sedate, christiano modo transigant : qnod enim exoptabant omnes, 
tolli et deleri servitutem, hoc prospere cedal optanduin maxinie est, nullo 
divini vel hnmani juris incommodo, nulla civitatis perturbatione, atque adeo 
cum solida ipsorum, quorum agitur caitsa, ntilitate servorum. Qmbus singu- 
latim, sive qui jam facli liberi sunt, sive qui fient propediem, monita nonnul- 
la salutis e sententiis delibata magni gentium Apostoli, pastorali cum 
studio animoque paterno commendamus. Ergo illi memoriam et voluntatem 
gratam pie ad eos servare diligenterque profiteri studeai t, quorum consilio 
operaque in libertatem vindicati sunt. Tanto se munere numquam prccbeant 
indignos, nee umquam libertatem cum licenlia cupiditatum permisceant ; ea 
vero utantur quo modo cives decet bene morales, ad indusiriam vitre 
actuosse, ad et ornamenta quum families turn civitatis. Vereri te 
colere majestatem principum, parere magistral ibus, legibus obtemperare, 
hiKC officia et similia, non tarn metu ndducti quam religione, assidue 
exsequantur : etiam cohibeant arceantque aliense copise et pirestantioe invi- 
diain, qute dolendum quam multos ex tenuioribus quotidie torqueat et 
quam multa ministret nequitise plena instrumenta alversus ordinum securitatem 
et pacem. Re sua et statu contenti, nihil cariu> cogitent, nihil appetant 
cupidius, quam bona regni coelestis, quorum gratia in lucem editi sunt et 
a Christo ledempii : de Deo eo lemque Dnmino ac Liberatore suo cum pietate 
sentiant, eum totis viribus diligant. ejus mnndata omni cura custodiant. 
Spons^ ejus, Ecclesioe sanctce, se fili^s esse gaudeant, esse optimos laborent, 
et quam possint amoris vicem seclulo reJdant. 

Though it may be freely admitted that the condition of the 
slave could hardly be worse than it was in the South previous 
to the war, it may be doubted whether the freedom thrust 
suddenly and violently upon the millions of negroes produced 
any amelioration of their condition , either material or spiritual. 
It certainly did not on the adult generation of that day. 
Catholics are by tradition and the logical consequences of their 
faith abolitionists. But under the guiding hand of the Church, 
when Catholics proceed to abolition, "omnia legitime, sedate, 

christiano modo transigunt nullo divini vel humani juris 

incommodo, nulla civitatis perturbatione, atque adeo cum solida 
ipsorum quorum agitur cau a. utilitate servorum." 

The golden rose was sent this year to the princess regent, 
Isabel of Brazil, in recognition of the part taken personally by 


herself and by the members of the imperial family in bringing 
about the emancipation of the slaves. 

We presume F. Slattery will have this magnificent document 
published in English for the use of his alumni and of his 
Afro-American congregations ; judiciously distributed among the 
benefactors of the missions to the colored people, it would 
doubtless do much good. 

[The subjoined document concerns priests as much as it does 
bishops. We do not know why such papers are not given 
immediate publicity in the United States. Any THE PASTOR 
publishes, are obtained, not from American, but European bishops.] 


De mandato Sanctissimi D. N. Leonis XIII. Snpremae Con- 
gregationi S Rom. et Univ. Inquisitionis nuperrimis temporibus 
duplex quaestionum genus expendendum propositum fuit. Primum 
respicit facultates, quibus urgente mortis periculo, quando tempus 
non suppetit recurrendi ad S. ^edem, augere conveniat locorum 
ordinaries dispensandi super impeditnentis publicis matrimonium 
dirimentibus cum iis, qui juxta civiles leges sunt conjunct! aut 
alias in concubinatu vivunt, ut morituri in tanta temporis 
angustia in faciem Ecclesiae rite copulari, et propriae conscientiae 
consulere valeant : alterum spectat ad executionem dispcnsationutn, 
qua; ab Apostolica Sede impertiri solent. 

Ad primum quod' attinet, re serio diligenterque perpensa, 
adprobatoque et confirmato Eminentissimorum Patrum una mecum 
Generalium Inquisitorum suffragio, Sanctitas Sua benigne annuit 
pro gratia, qua locorum ordinarii dispensare valeant sive per se, 
sive per ecclesiasticam personam sibi benevisam, segrotos in gra- 
vissimo mortis periculo constitutes, quando non suppetit tempus 
recurrendi ad S. Sedem super impediments quantumvis publicis 
matrimonium jure ecclesiastic dirimentibus, excepto sacro presby- 
teratus Ordine, et affinitate Iinea5 rectae ex copula licita proveniente. 

Mens autem est ejusdem Sanctitatis Suas, ut si quando, quod 
absit, necessitas ferat, ut dispensandum sit cum iis, qui sacro 
subdiaconatus aut diaconatus Ordine sunt insigniti, vel solemnem 
professionem religiosam emiserint, atque post dispensationem et 
matrimonium rite celebratum convaluerint, in extraordinariis 
hujusmodi casibus, ordinarii de impertita dispensatione Supremam 
Sancti Officii Congregationem certiorem faciant, et interim omni 
ope curent, ut scandalum, si quod adsit, eo meliori modo quo 


fieri possit removeatur, turn inducendo eosiem, ut in loca se 
conferant, ubi eorum conditio ecclesiastica aut religiosa ignoratur, 
turn si id obtineri nequeat, injungendo saltern iisdem spiritualia 
exercitia aliasque salutares poenitientias, atque earn vitoe rationem, 
quag praeteritis excessibus redimendis apta videatur, quasque fidelibus 
exemplo sit ad recte et christiane vivendum. 

De altero vero quaestionum genere, item adprobato et confirmato 
eorundem Eminentissimorum Patrum suffragio Sanctissimus sanxit : 

1. Dispensationes matdmoniales omnes in posterum commit- 
tendas esse vel oratorum ordinario vel ordinario loci. 

2. Appellatione ordinarii venire episcopos, administrators seu 
vicarios apostolicos, praelatos seu praefectos habentes jurisdictionem 
cum territorio separate, eorumque officiates seu vicarios in 
spiritualibus generates, et sede vacante vicarium capitularem vel 
legitimum administratorem. 

3. Vicarium capitularem seu administratorem eas quoque 
dispensationes apostolicas exequi posse, quae remissae fuerint 
episcopo aut vicario ejus generali vel officiali nondum execution! 
mandatas, sive hi illas exequi coeperint, sive non. Et vicissim, 
sede deinde provisa, posse episcopum vel ejus vicaiium in 
spiritualibus generalem seu officialem exequi dispensationes, quae 
vicario capitulari exequendae remissae fuerant, seu hie illas exequi 
coeperit seu minus. 

4. Dispensationes malrimoniales ordinario oratorum commissas, 
exequendas esse ab illo ordinario, qui litteras testimoniales dedit, 
vel preces transmisit ad S. Sedem Apostolicam, sive sit ordinarius 
originis sive domicilii, sive utriusque sponsi, sive alterutrius 
eorum ; etiamsi sponsi quo tempore executioni danda erit dispen- 
satio, relicto illius dioscesis donrcilio, in aliam dioscesim disces- 
serint non amplius reversuri, monito tamen, si id expedite 
judicaverit, ordinario loci, in quo matrimonium contrahitur. 

5. Ordinario praedicto fas esse, si ita quoque expedire judica- 
verit, ad dispensationis executionem delegare alium ordinarium, 
eum prassertim, in cujus dioecesi sponsi actu degunt. 

Haec quae ad pastorale ministerium utilius faciliusque reddendum 
Sanctissimus Dominus Noster concedenda et statuenda judicavit, 
dum libens tecum communico, bona cuncta Amplitudini Tuae 
precor a Domino. 

Datum Romas die 20 Februarii 1888. 

Raph. C-ird. MONACO. 



Beatissime Pater : Nicolaus Mauron, Congregationis SSmi. 
Redemptoris Superior Generalis et Rector Major, ad pedes 
Sanctitatis Vestrae provolutus, humillime exponit quae sequuntur : 
Per Decretum 23 Maji 1871 Emi Cardinalis in Urbe Vicarii, 
canonice instituta est in ecclesia Congregationis nostrae ad S. 
Alphonsum M. de Ligorio Pia Unio sub titulo et invocatione 
B. V. Mariae de Perpetuo Succursu et S. Alphonsi. Hose eadem 
Pia Unio, per Litteras Apostolicas in forma Brevis diei 31 
Martii 1876 a Sanctitatis Vestrae Praedecessore, Pio IX fel. rec., 
ad archisodalitatis honorem evecta est cum omnibus et singulis 
juribus et facultatibus solitis et consuetis ; atque ad earn regendam, 
ceu moderator generalis, constitutus est Superior Generalis et 
Rector Major pro tempore Congregationis SSmi Redemptoris. 
Non raro autem accidit ut ejusdem nominis et tituli sodalitates 
erigantur a Rmis locorum ordinarii?, vi facultatis illis collatae ex 
speciali Apostolico Indulto erigendi sodalitates, cum indulgentii?, 
quibus in Urbe perfruuntur respectivae archiconfraternitates, absque 
ulia exhibita petitione aggregationis sodalitatis moderatori generali. 
Id vero, uti experientia comprobat, in . ejusdem sodalitatis bonum 
minime vergit. In his siquidem sodalitatibus tili modo erectis, 
quae nullo inter se vinculo conjunguntur cum sodalitate primaria 
seu archisodalitate, quae ab Apostolica Sede uti centrum aliarum 
fuit constituta, paulatim ea deficit unitas directionis. 

Ex Audientia Sanctissimi did 22 Februarii 1888. Sanctissimus 
Dnus Noster Leo Papa XIII benigne annuit pro gratia juxta 
preces, ceteris servatis de jure servandis. Praesenti in ptrptluum 
valituro absque ulla Brevis expeditione. Contrariis quibuscumqut 
non obstamibus. 

Datum Romoe ex Secretaiia S. Congregationis Indulgentiis 
Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae die 22 Februarii 1888. 

S. Card. Vannutelli Prcefictus. 
Alexander Episcopus Oensis Secrdarius. 

[See THE PASTOR, Vol. VI., p. 120 seq.. Bishops can erect 
the Sodality of Our Lady of P. H. without Fr. Mauron's per- 
mission, but the bishops' sodalities have no right to the indul- 
gences granted the one erected in St. Alphonsus' Church, Rome.] 

Si essent omnes perfecti, quid tune haberemus ab illis pro 
Deo pati ? 



The following letter neatly expresses the precise teaching of 
the Baltimore Council. The whole school system is radically 
wrong. It is all that infidels desire. But then, while never 
tolerating what is essentially bad, malum in se, we must con- 
trive to adjust ourselves to the difficult circumstances in which 
we are placed. About our schools and our school system, 
the writer is in peifect accord with the Masonic Grand Master, 
Maret. * " What kind of men and women will be developed 
from these neutral schools in which it is forbidden even to 
mention the name of God ? We know what our adversaries 
think of this neutrality. The Masonic leader Maret thus writes 
in the Radical: 'What! would they have the priests fall in 
love with the anti-Catholic school ? The pretended neutrality is 
nonsense (une betise). Neutrality in that matter is impossible. 
When a teacher does not teach religion, by the very fact he 
teaches irreligion. To pretend we only aim at impartial 
neutrality is bare-faced hypocrisy.'" Georges Candy in Bibliographic 
Catholique, Feb. 1888. 


Editor Herald ': I see in your issue of to-day a telegram 
from West Chester, this State, in reference to the exclusion 
from the Sacraments of two Catholics of that place, who send 
their children to the public schools. 

The telegram contains a misrepresentation of my instruction 
to the rector of the church there. That instruction was to ex- 
clude from the Sacraments only such parents as neglected the 
religious education of their children at home. 

This is found to be too frequently the case with parents who 
do not send their children to Catholic schools. 'The result is 
that the children grow up without the knowledge and restraints 
of religion, an-I become in too many instances the worst mem- 
bers of society. 

1 " Quelles generations formeront ces 6coles neutres, d'oti le pretre est exild, 
ou le nom de Dieu ne doit pas meme etre prononce ? Nous savons ce que nos 
adversaires pensent de cette neutralite. Le frere Maret a dit dans le Radical ; 
' On voudrait forcer les prtres a aimer 1'ecole anti-catholique, car la 
pre"tendue neutralite est une betise ; il n'y a pas de neutralite possible. 
Du moment ou un instituteur n'enseigne pas la religion, il enseigne par 
la meme 1'incredulite ; pretendre qu'on ne veut que la neutralite, c'est de 
la tartuferie du dix-septieme degre.' " 


The Catholic who neglects to instruct his children at home, 
and neglects to send them for instruction to a Catholic school, is 
derelict in all important parental duty and unfit for the Sacraments. 

My instruction to Father Spaulding I communicated to one 
of the parties mentioned the only one who consulted me. 

The telegram contains also a most unjust reflection on the 
Sisters of the Villa Maria Convent, \vho conduct a first-class 
academy at West Chester. Your obedient servant. 

P. J. RYAX, 
Archbishop of Philadelphia. 


An episcopus possit transferre festum dedicationis ? 

Eesp. : Dedicationis festi mutationem spectare ad consecratorem 
in actu consecrationis; adeo ut extra ipsam non possit amplius 
immutari, inconsulta Sede Apostolica. (2873.) 

If the feast of the anniversary of the dedication be trans- 
ferred, the candles before the twelve crosses are to be lighted, 
not on the anniversary proper, but on the day the mass and 
office of the dedication are said: 

Accendenda sunt lumina ante cruces positas in parietibus ea 
die, ad quam transfertur celebratio officii dedicationis. (2979.) 

Ex S. Cong. S. Officii. 

Num mulier per utriusque ovarii excisi clefectum sterilis effecta, ad ma- 
tnmonium ineundum permitti valeat et liceat necne ? 

Re^p. die 3 Februarii 1887. Re mature diuque perpensa, matrimonium 
mulieris, de quo in casu, non esse impediendum. 


In the faculties granted our bishops we read, under the head- 
ing Facilitates extroardinarice D. art. 3.: " Dispensandi cum 

subditis, exceptis Italis de quibiis 11011 coiistet 
Italicum domiciliiim oiimiiio cleseruisse atque 

excepto in>uper cas-u matiimonii cum viro vel muliere Judaeis, 
super impedimento disparitatis cultus etc." 

That clause exceptis Halls etc., is no longer in force. Zitelli, in 
a new edition of his work De Dispensationilus Mairimoniali- 
bus writes: Congregatio S. Officii, feria iv. die 4 Maji, 1887, 
decrevit quoad facultatem dispensandi super impedimentis sive 
mixtas religionis. jive disparitatis cultus, esse demendam in 


foimulis clausulam Exccptis Italis de quibus non constd Italicum 
domiahwn omnino deseruisse. 

This will be no small relief to priests, who will be no longer 
bound to ascertain what the Italian's intentions are as to his 
future domicile. Most of them coming here expect to return 
as soon as they have scraped together a few hundred dollars, 
and pass their declining years in sunny Italy. But as a matter 
of fact only a small percentage of them do so. 

The clause was originally introduced in 1865 by the following 
Decree, addressed in the first instance to the archbishop of Dublin: 

DECRETUM. Relatum est Apostolicae Sedi abusum hunc non 
raro contigisse ; ut videlicet Itali qui in externas dioeceses proficis- 
cuntur, atque in iis peregre versantur, dispensationes obtineant 
super impedimento mixtae religionis. Ne unquam igitur ejusmodi 
factum instauretur in posterum Sanctissimus Dominus Noster Pius 
PP. IX. de consilio Eminentissimorum Patrum Generalium In- 
quisitorum censuit in Dno prDScipiendum, ut omnes et singuli 
episcopi, qui facultate instructi sunt dispensandi super dicto im- 
pedimento, certiores efnciantur, in ejusdem usu excipi Italos, de 
quibus non constet Italicum domicilium omnino deseruisse. 

Romae, ex Aedibus S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide, die 
30 Augusti 1865. 

A. Card. Barnabo, Prcef. 

The third article of the Facilitates e\traordinari(B D. concludes : 
servata in reliquu adjecta instructions tvpis impressa. The Instruction 
may be seen in the Ada ct Decreta of the Second Plenary Council 
of Baltimore, p. 311. 


All publications ttf be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the E litor. Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranfjrd, N. J. 

more advanced students in Catholic c-illeges. academies, and high sch ols, 
for persons of culture, del as well as young; with a popu'ar refu- 
tation of the principal modern errors. Improved Edition. Compiled 
from God the Teacher of Mankind. The Rev. M. Miiller, C. SS. R., 
Series. Octavo, cloth, pp. xxix-446. 

"I have no hesitation to send my recommendation to your 
series (of catechisms), especially numbers 3 and 4, as they cover 
a ground not occupied by the catechism authorized and ap- 
proved by the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, and as 


they are strongly marked by soundness of doctrine, simplicity 
and plainness of language, a spirit of faith and devotion, pre- 
cision in expressing and defining Catholic truths." Letter of 
Cardinal Gibbons to Father Miiller. 


classes of parochial schools. Third improved edition. The Rev. M. 

Miiller, C. SS. R., series. 241110. cloth, pp. xxii-3o7, with a Summary of 

Sacred History covering 52 pages, followed by an Appendix of prayers 

and devotions extending over 57 additional pages. 
CATECHISM OF CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, No. i. For beginners. Paper. The 

Rev. M. Miiller, C. SS. R., series. Benziger Bros. 
CATECHISM OF CATHOLIC DOCTRINE. No. ii. For the intermediate classes of 

parochial schools. Paper. The Rev. M. Miiller, C. SS. R., series. 

Benziger Bros. 

EMANARUNT. In auditorum usum edidit Henricus Denzinger, \Vircebur- 
gensis Professor. Small octavo, paper, pp. viii-445. Benziger Bros., 1888. 

There is no book in print of its size that a professor of 
dogmatic theology will find more frequent use for. Beginning 
with the Apostles Creed, of which \ve have thirteen of the early 
versions, the author passes on from Pope to Pope, from Council 
to Council, giving us the dogmatic definitions or declarations 
made by each in chronological order, down to and inc'uding the 
Vatican Council. The work is then supplemented by an Index 
Systtmaticus Materiarum. In this we have in regular order all the 
usual headings of the treatises given in a dogmatic course. 
Under each heading, for instance De Rdigione el de Fide et Ra- 
tione, the author briefly but clearly enunciates a series of Catholic 
truths as: " Philosophia in naturae, theologia in revelata veritate 
investiganda versatur." He then refers to the different dogmatic 
utterances to this effect of Popes and Councils. Next comes De 
Fontibus Veritatis Revelata?, De Ecclesia, De Hierarchia ecclesias- 
tica, De Potestate ecclesiastica, De Deo Uno et Trino ut in se 
est, De Creatione et Creatis, etc. This Index Systematicus, covering 
45 closely printed pages, is a complete course of dogmatic 
theology built up in the defining words of Popes and Councils. 
Looking over it, we really missed nothing. In addition to this 
peculiar merit it has another that will render the book very 
acceptable to students. It furnishes texts of document?, both of 
Popes and Council?, that are not always to be had in an ordinary 
l.brary. Thus we have all the important decrees of the Council 


of Constance, of the Council of Florence (with the decrees of 
Eugene IV., for the union of the Greeks and that "ad Ar- 
menos ") together with all the important' dogmatic utteiances 
against modern errors pronounced by Pius VI., Pius VII., Pius 
VIII., Gregory XVI., and Pius IX. The student of theology- 
will find this little Enchiridion a treasure, indeed. 

"Multae sunt propositiones, quae, si ad verba sola respicias, 
sensum sanum admittunt, in sensu tamen auctoris, in quo 
damnantur, perversae sunt atque rejiciendre. Qui sensus igitur 
vel ex dogmatum historia vel ex systematis damnati nexu desu- 
mendus eiit." Preface. 
LIFE FO BLESSED JOHN FISCHER, Bishop of Rochester, Cardinal of the 

Holy Roman Catholic Church, and martyr under Henry VIII. By the 

Rev. L. E. Bridgett, C.SS.R. Cetano, cloth, pp. xxvi. 452. London . 

Burns and Gates. New Y> rk: the Catholic Publication Society Co. 


CONVERTS. By James J. Trecicy. I2tno., cloth, pp. xvii. 423. New 
York: Fr. Pustet & Co., 1888. 

This is a selection of extracts from the writings of converts. 
Volumes of the kind could be multiplied indefinitely. The com- 
piler shows that he has had access to well-filled book shelves. 

BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. By Dom. Louis-Marie Rouvier, late Prior of 
the Chartreuse of Montiieux. English edition by the Carthusian 
Fathers of St. t Hugh's Park Minster. Small octavo, cloth, pp. xxxiv. 
214. London : Burns and Gates. New York : the Catholic Publica- 
tion Society Co. 1888. 

Among books of Devotion to the Blessed Virgin none have 
attained a wider circulation in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain 
than Fr. Rc.uvier's Novcna. In France alone, if we are not 
mistaken, upwards of a hundred thousand copies have been dis- 
posed of in a short time. The first 51 pages are given up to 
the nine meditations of the Novena proper. That for the eighth 
day,- "Enlightened Piety," is worth the price of the volume. 
Pages 152 199 are occupied by appropriate "Spiritual Readings 
for each day of the Novena." Whether these " Readings " were 
selected or are the original composition of Father Rouvier, they 
are certainly very appropriate and impressive. Though a transla- 
tion, we have met with no Gallicisms in the book. That is a 
rare merit. Then follow "Occasional Prayers" and ''Extracts 
from the Holy Fathers in Praise of the Blessed Virgin/ 


As soon as this little work becomes known it will certainly ob- 
tain a wide circulation among the clients of Mary in the 
United States. This is the best of all its kind that we have 
come across. It was officially examined at Rome and favorably 
reported to the Sovereign Pontiff. 

THE LITTLE BOOK OF OUR LADY : A History of some of the Devotions 
and Days allotted to her by the Church. 2*mo, pp. viii. 40. Lon- 
don: Burns and Gates. New York: The Catholic Publication Society 
Co. 1 888. 

YEAR. Translated from the French by Helen O'Donnell. 24 mo. cloth, 
red edges with pages neatly bordered, pp. 124. Benziger Bros. 1888. 

LlBER STATUS ANIMARUM : a bo.>k made up in accordance with the Roman 
Ritual and the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore and published with 
the Approbation of the Most Rev. Archbishop of New York. 

This is a folio volume made and bound of any number of 
quires to order. The page is divided by perpendicular red 
lines into spaces. The spaces are headed by the special im- 
formation it is desired to record, as Fear, Month, Day, The 
Names of Parents, Residence, Last previous Residence, Occu- 
pation, Country of Birth, Age, etc., etc., with a roomy space 
column for Remarks at the end. Truly, in this Liber " the 
Reverend Pastor (or his successors) will have at a glance a true 
picture of his congregation." The time is truly come to insist 
on parish books being kept in belter order than they have 
been generally in the past. This publication of Pustet's is all 
that could be desired, and will both indicate the work to be 
done as well as simplify the doing of it. 

the Very Rev. James H. Defouri, Pastor of the Church of Our Lady 
of Guadalupe, Santa Fe. 

Too many of these sketches we cannot have. They are 
indeed like " brands snatched from the burning." Much of 
the early history of the churches and missions in the United 
States is irreparably lost. However, there is a stir in the di- 
rection of saving what may yet be saved from Time, the 
destroyer, and we can only hope, that, with the impetus given 
the movement by our Historical Societies, the good work may 
be taken up by many hands and pushed vigorously. 

Father Defouri's pamphlet of 164 closely printed pages is 
intensely interesting. Its composition must have cost him a 
great deal of time and travel. 

"Oplo magis seniire compundionem quam scire ejus definition em" a Kempis 


JULY, 1888. 

No. 9. 


Whether in practice or theory, there was heretofore no moral 
problem more difficult than to define the limit line between 
liberty and license. To reconcile Christian obedience with manly 
Christian liberty seemed impossible. Between abject subserviency 
and open or cloaked disaffection and disloyalty, there seemed to 
be no medium. Many educated laymen, from a radically wrong 
conception of liberty, chafe under the restraints of Church regu- 
lations, and by their talk and influence, and often example, lead 
others to open revolt. Why this ? The men are not ill but well- 
inclined. It comes of their ignorance of the nature of liberty, 
and of their not knowing that liberty and law must ever go hand 
in hand. Without law, no liberty : without liberty, no law. It 
comes of their ignorance of the nature of law, as much as of their 
ignorance of tfie nature of liberty. As they confound liberty with, 
the absence of restraint, so they confound law with the commands 
or precepts of an individual. The lime has come when it is a 
prime necessity to make all intelligent Catholics, especially in 
this land of freedom, thoroughly comprehend what liberty is, what 
law is ; and that liberty is not only compatible with reverence 
and submission to those to whom reverence and submission are- 
due, but that in freely yielding them, in proper Jime and place, 
no one lowers his manhood one whit. For in doing so they bend, 
not to the individual, however high his station or great his power ;: 
they obey not a fellow-mortal's mandate or whim ; but they 
obey, like men, laws of decorum, propriety, or order, which, as 
laws, have their own approbation. To be laws, these enactments, 
whether of usage or statute, must be according to right reason. 
In obeying them, the free man is but following the dictates of 
his own best judgment (reason) ; and in choosing to obey them, 
is exercising his natural and Christian freedom. 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 




1. Liberty is nature's noblest gift. It can be enjoyed only 
by beings that possess reason and intelligence. Liberty gives 
dignity to man, by placing him in his own guidance and 
making him master of his actions. But how this dignity will 
be borne by man is a matter of much concern. For it can 
become to him a source of the greatest good or the greatest 
evil. He can, if he wish, follow the dictates of reason and 
morality, and march directly towards the end for which he was 
made. But he can, likewise, turn into other paths, pursue de- 
ceiving semblances of good, pervert things from their proper 
ends, and rush of his own will to perdition. 

2. Our Redeemer, Jesus Christ, by restoring and even augment- 
ing the original dignity of humanity, did much for the human 
will. By the aid of his grace here and the inducement of 
eternal reward in the hereafter, he has raised it to loftier aims. 
Hence the Catholic Church always did exalt, and always will, 




De Liber tate Humana. 


Venerabiles Fratres: 


I. Libertas, pnestantissimum naturoe bonum, idemque intelligentia aut 
ratione utentium naturarum unice proprium, hanc tribuit honiini dignitatem 
ut sit in manu consilii stii, obtineatque actionum suarum potestatem. 
Verumtamen ejusmodi dignitas plurimum interest qua ratione geratur, quia 
sicut summa bona, ita et summa mala ex libertatis usu gignuntur. Sane 
ii.tegrum est homini parere rationi, morale bonum sequi, ad summum 
finem suum recta contendere. Sed idem potest ad omnia alia deflectere, 
fallacesque bonorum imagines persecutus, ordinem debitum perturbare, et in 
interitum ruere voluntarium. 

II. Liberator humani generis, Jesus Christus, restituta atque aucta naturae 
dignitate pristina, plurimum ipsam juvit hominis voluntatem ; eamque hinc 
adjunctis gratise suse praesidiis, illinc sempiterna in coelis felicitate proposita, 
ad meliora erexit. Similique ratione de hoc tarn excellent! naturae bono et 


extol and sound the praises of this admirable gift of nature ; 
for, k is the mission of the Church to go on, to the end of 
time, dispensing the benefits derived from the Redemption. 

3. And yet there are many \vho fancy, that the Church is 
adverse to human liberty. The notion is based on a false and 
absurd idea of what liberty really is. Their idea of it is a 
muddled one, and they will, in consequence, have human liberty 
extend to things regarding which man cannot properly claim 
freedom of thought or action. 

4. We have spoken elsewhere, particularly in our encyclical 
Immortah Dei, of the so called freedom of the present age. 
We pointed out what there is in it of good, what reprehensible. 
We at the same time showed that whatever there is in it of 
good is not modern, but as old as truth itself, and that both 
in theory and practice this was always fostered by the Church. 
The only thing new, is that wherein liberty is vitiated, the 
product of social turbulence and the revolutionary spirit of 
the day. Many, however, persist in claiming that this modern 
liberty, even in its worst phases, is the crowning glory of our 
age, and the necessary basis of our political institutions. With- 
out it, say they, no orderly government is conceivable. With a 
view to the public good, then, we now propose to speak simply 
and by itself of this freedom of the age. 

merita est et constanter merebitur Ecclesii catholica, proptereaquod ejus 
est, parta nobis per Jesum Christum beneficia in omnem sceculorum eetatem 

III. Nihilominus complures numerantur, qui obesse Ecclesiam humanae 
libertati patent. Cujus rei causa in perverse quodam proeposteroque residet 
de ipsa libertate judicio. Hanc enim vel in ipsa sui intelligentia adulterant, 
vel plus sequo opinione dilatant, ita ut pevtinere ad res sane multas con- 
tendant, in quibus, si recte dijudicari velit, liber esse homo non potest. 

IV. Alias nos, nominatimque in litteris Encyclicis Immortale Dei, de 
modernis, uti loquuntur, libertatibus, verba fecimus, id quod honestum est 
secernentes ab eo quod contra ; simul demonstravimus, quidquid iis liber- 
tatibus continetur boni, id tarn esse vetus, quam est veritas ; illudque 
semper Ecclesiam libentissime probare et re usuque recipere solitam. Id 
quod accessit novi, si verum quzeritur, in parte quadam inquinatiore 
consistit, quam turbulenta tempora ac rerum novarum libido nimia perperere. 
Sed quoniam sunt plures in hac opinione pertinaces, ut eas libertates, in 
eo etiam quod continent vitii, summum setatis nostrse decus et constituen- 
darum civitatum fundamentum necessarium putent, ita ut, sublatis iis, per- 
fectam gubernationem reipublicze cogitari posse negent, idcirco videtur, 
publica Nobismetipsis utilitate proposita, ejusmodi argumentum pertractari 
separatim oportere. 


5. Moral liberty, whether conceived in the individual or in 
the body politic, is properly the object of our discourse. 
But it will be useful to introduce the subject with a few 
words on natural liberty. For this, though distinct from moral, 
is really the root from which liberty of every kind naturally 

Reason and common sense, which is nature's own voice, tell 
us that liberty can be possessed only by beings endowed with 
intelligence and the reasoning faculty. It is due solely to his 
possession of liberty that man can be truly said to be the 
author of his own doings. And very properly : for, whereas 
other animals are guided only by the senses, and are pushed 
by instinct to obtain what is good for them, and avoid what 
is bad, man has reason constantly for his guide. And his 
reason tells him that all and every one of the desirable things 
aiound him are merely contingent, that they may or may not 
have being, indifferently : it tells him that no one of these things 
is necessary to man, and consequently places the power of choos- 
ing this one rather than that in his own will. 

6. Now, in regard to contingent things of this sort, Contingenlia 
man is capable of forming a judgment, because he has from 
nature a soul not composed of parts, but spiritual and endowed 
with the faculty of reasoning. Possessing such a soul, man 
cannot have drawn his whole being from corporal things, nor 

V. Libertatem moralem recta persequimur, sive in personis ea singulis, 
sive in civitate sp-.ctetur. Principio tamen Juvat aliquid de libertate natttrali 
breviter dicere, quia quamquam a morali omnino distinguitur, fons tamen 
atque principium est, uncle genus omne libertatis sua vi suaque sponte nascitur ; 

Hanc quidem omnium judicium sensusque cummunis, quce certissima naturae 
vox est, in iis solum agnoscit, qui sint intelligentioe vel rationis compotes, 
in eaque ipsa caussam inesse apparet, cur aucior eorum, quae ab eo aguntur, 
verissime habeatur homo. Et recte quidem ; nam quando ceteri animantes 
solis ducuntur sensibus, soloque naturce impulsu anquirunt quoe sibi prosint, 
fugiuntque contraria, homo quidem in singulis vitse factis rationem habet 
ducem. Ratio autem, quoecumque habentur in terris bona, omnia et singula 
posse judicat esse, et seque posse non esse ; et hoc ipso nullum eorum 
decernens esse necessario sumendum, potestatem optionemque voluntati facit 
ut eligat, quod lubeat. 

VI. Sed de contingentia, ut appellant, eorum bonorum, qure diximus, ob 
hanc caussam judicare homo potest, quod animum habet natura simplicem, 
spiritualem cogitationisque participem : qui idcirco quod est ejusmodi, non a 
rebus corporeis ducit originem, neque pendet ex eis in conservatione sui ; 
sed, nulla re intercedente, ingeneratus a Deo, communemque corporum conditi- 


can he depend on them for the continuance of his existence. 
Coming directly from the hands of God, man far transcends 
the ordinary condition of corporal existence. Laws of life he 
has and laws of action peculiar to himself. Thus, though ap- 
prehending the unchangeable and necessary laws of The. Good and 
The True, he sees at the same time that no one in particular 
of the many contingent things that are good and true, is neces- 
sary for him. Hence, once it is established that the soul of man 
is absolutely immmaterial, and that it is endowed with the faculty 
of reasoning, human liberty is established on a basis immovable. 
7. Just as the Church teaches the immateriality, spirituality, and 
immortality of the soul, so also she loudly proclaims and ever 
asserts, man's liberty. She always did so, and even maintains 
it as a dogma of religion. And not only that ; but whenever 
it was questioned by heretics or innovators, the Church cham- 
pioned the cause of liberty and rescued from ruin this grand 
prerogative of man. One need only consult the writings evoked 
by the insane efforts of the Manicheans to see with what ardor 
she repelled the denial of human liberty ; and, to come to a 
later day, every one knows with what scrupulous anxiety, with 
what vehemence she asserted the free will of man, both in the 
Council of Trent and in her war upon Jansenism. She never 
would, not for an instant, tolerate Fatalism. 

8. Liberty, then, as we have said, can belong only to beings 
gifted with reason and intelligence. In its essential conception 

onem longo intervallo transgrediens, suum et proprium habet vivendi genus, 
suum agendi ; quo fit ut, immutabilibus ac necessariis veri bonique rationibus 
judicio comprehensis, bona ilia singularia nequaquam esse necessaria videat. 
Itaque cum animos hominum segregates esse statuitur ab omni concretione 
mortal! eosdemque facultate cogitandi pollere, simul naturalis iibertas in 
fundamento suo firmissime constituitur. 

VII. Jamvero sicut animi humani naturam simplicem. spiritualem atque im- 
mortalem, sic et libertatem nemo nee altius prredicat, nee constantius asserit 
Ecclesia catholica, qure scilicet utrumque omni tempore docuit, sicque tuetur 
ut dogma. Neque id solum ; sed contra dicentibus haereticis novarumque 
opinionum fautoribus, patrocinium libertatis Ecclesia suscepit, hominisque 
tarn grande bonum ab interitu vindicavit. In quo genere, litterarum monu- 
menta testantur, insanos Manichseorum aliorumque conatus quanta contentione 
repulerit ; recentiori autem relate nemo est ne^cius quanto studio quantaque 
vi turn in Concilio Tridentino, turn p-istea adversus Jansenii sectatores, pro 
libero hominis arbitrio dimicaverit, nullo tempore nulloque loco Fatalismum 
passa consistere. 

VIII, Libertas itaque, ut diximus, eorum est, qui rationis aut intelligentice 


it is the faculty of selecting the means for attaining a desired 
Jesuit, in such sort that he who selects one means rather than 
another, may be properly said to be the author of his own act. 
Now, whatever means is thus selected, is selected for that quality 
of good in it which makes it useful. The Good, as such, is 
the object which puts the will into action by arousing desire. 
The will selects that particular means rather than another. Thus 
the faculty of selecting freedom is an attribute of the will, 
or rather is the will itself in action according to its own law of 
liberty. But the will is never moved until the intellect, like a 
torch, has thrown its light on the object ; so that the Good 
desired by the will must always be that Good which, as such, 
is present to the intellect. For an act of the intellect, affirm- 
ing the utility of the means to the end, and affirming which 
means of many is the more suitable, must necessarily precede 
the act of the will desiring such means. As everyone knows, 
this mental operation, by which the serviceableness of the means 
for the end proposed is affirmed, is an act, not of the will, but of 
the intellect. The will therefore is, by its very nature, subject 
to the intellect : and as liberty resides wholly in the will, that, 
too, like the will itself, is confined by its very nature to desiring 
only the things approved as good by the intellect. 

9. But as both the intellect and the will are impeifect, the 
former may, and often does, portray a seeming good for real to 
the latter. And desire is thus awakened for what is not good. 
The liability to err, as well as the fact of erring, bespeaks 

stint pnrticipes, propria; eademque, si natura ejus consideretur, nihil est aliud 
nisi facultas eligendi res ad id, quod propositum est, idoneas, quatenus qui 
facultatem habet unum aliquod eligendi e pluribus, is est factorum suorum 
dominus. Jamver ) quia onme, quod rei cujuspiam adipiscendse caussa assu- 
mitur, rationem habet boni, quod tittle dicitur ; bonum autem hoc habet 
natura, ut proprie aiipetitionem moveat, idcirco liberum arbitrium est voluntatis 
proprium, seu potius ipsa voluntas est, quatenus in ngendo habet delectus fa- 
cultatem. Sed nequaquam voluntas movetur, nisi mentis cognitio velut fax 
quaedam praeluxerit ; videlicit bonum, voluntati concupitum, est necessario bo- 
num quatenus rationi cognitum. Eo vel magis quod in omnibus voluntatibus 
delectum semper judicatio prreit de veritate bonorum, et quodnam sit ante- 
ponendum ceteris. Atqui judicare, rationis esse, non voluntatis, nemo sapiens 
dubitat. Libertas igitur si in voluntate inest, quaa natura sua appetitus est 
rationi obediens, consequitur ut et ipsa, sicut voluntas, in bono versetur 
rationi consentaneo. 

IX. Nihilominus quoniam utraque facultas a perfecto abest, fieri potest 
ac saepe fit, ut mens voluntati proponat quod nequaquam sit reapse bonum 


imperfection. The object of the will's desire is the Good only. 
That it can embrace evil, argues the will's imperfection. 
In thus embracing evil the will, of course, proves its 
freedom. But it is freedom so much the more imperfect. 
The moaning of the sick man proves that life is still left. 
But they prove at the same time his weakly condition. Thus 
the will, which, in all things, should be guided by reason, 
makes a misuse of its liberty and proves the imperfection of 
that liberty whenever it covets or embraces anything that right 
reason would not sanction. Hence God, infinitely perfect and 
omniscient, and essentially good, possesses freedom of will in 
its perfection. The perfection of his will and of its freedom 
makes it impossible for him to wish evil. Nor can the 
blessed in heaven wish aught wrong for a like reason, the 
perfection of their wills and the perfection of their fieedom being 
maintained by the beatific vision. 

10. Against the Pelagians St. Augustine and others aptly 
argued : If to have the power to do zurong pertained to the 
nature and to the perfection of freedom, then God, Jesus Christ, 
the angels and saints, who can do no wrong,, would have no 
freedom, or their freedom would not be as perfect as that of 
man in his state of pilgrimage and imperfection. To this subject 
the Angelic Doctor frequently refers. He proves convincingly 
that the faculty to do wrong is an indication of servitude, 
not of liberty. Thus, commenting on those words of Christ: 

sed habeat adumbratam speciem boni, atque in id sese voluntas applicet. 
Verum sicut en-are posse, reque ipsa errare, vitium est, quod mentem 
non omni parte perfectam arguit, eodem modo arripere fallax fictumque 
bonum, esto indicium liberi arbitrii, sicut regritudo viUe, est tamen vitium 
quoddam libertatis. Ita pariter voluntas hoc ipso quod a ratione pendet, 
quando quidquam appetat quod a recta ratione dissideat, vitio quodam 
funditus inquinat libertatem, eademque perverse utitur. Ob eamque caus- 
sam Deus infinite perfectus, qui cum sit summe intelligens et per essen- 
tiam bonitas, est etiam summe liber, malum culpse velle nulla ratione 
potest ; nee possunt, propter contemplationem summi boni, beati cselites. 
X. Scite Augustinus aliique adversus Pelagianos hoc animadvertebant, si 
posse deficere a bono secundum naturam esset perfectionemque libertatis, 
jam Deus. Jesus Christus, angeli, beati, in quibus omnibus ea potestas non 
est, aut non essent liberi, aut certe minus perfecte essent, quam homo 
viator atque imperfectus. De qua re Doctor Angelicus multa srepe disputat, 
ex quibus effici cogique potest, facultatem peccandi non libertatem esse, sed 
servitutem. Subtillissime illud in verba Christi Domini (J), " Qui facit 

1 Joan, viii., 34. 


" Whosoever committeth sin, is the servant of sin," (John 
viii.. 34) he argues with great nicety : Each thing is what 
it is, by the fact of possessing the qualities proper to the nature 
of that thing. When anything is moved to action by a force exter- 
nal to itself, that thing does not act of itself, but by the impression from 
without : and its action is> therefore, servile. Man is, according to his 
nature, a rational being. When he is, therefore, moved to action by 
' reason, he acts of himself, and of his oivn powers. This is freedom. 
But when man sins, his act is not suggested by reason. He is moved 
to action by a force external to his nature, and his act is determined 
by this external force. And therefore, " Whosoever committeth 
sin, is the servant of sin " And of this truth even the ancient 
philosophers were fully conscious, especially that school with whom 
it was an axiom that none are truly free but the wise. By the 
wise in this connection they meant, as is well known, those who 
had learned to live according to nature, that is, according to 
reason and virtue. 

Ji. Right reason, then, being the requisite condition for man's 
freedom, his intellect was to be fortified by suitable assistance and 
safeguards, to help it in directing all his actions towards the 
good, and restraining them from evil ; otherwise man's freedom 
might become very detrimental to himself. And first of all he 
needed a law, that is a guide pointing out .to him what things 
may be done, what should be avoided (according to sound reason). 
This thing, law, can have no existence for beings not gifted with 
reason. For, whatever these do, they do by necessity, under im- 

peccatum servus est peccati : " -Unumquodque est ilhid, quod convenit ei 
secundum naturam. Quando ergo movetur ab aliqito extraneo, non operatur 
secundum se, sed ab impressione alterins : quod est servile. Homo antetn 
secundum snam naturam est ralionalis. Quando ergo movetur secundnm 
rationem, proprio motu movetur et secundum se operatur : qvod est libertatis ; 
quando vtro peccat, opcralur prater rationem, et tune movetur quasi ab alto, 
retentus terminis alienis : et idea "qui facit peccatum, servus est peccati." 
Quod satis perspicue ipsa viderat philosophia veterum, atque ii prascipue 
quorum est doctrina, nisi sapientem, libcrum esse neminem : sapientem vero, 
uti exploratum est, nominabant, qui constanter secundum naturam, hoc est 
honeste et cum virtute, vivere didicisset. 

XI. Quoniam igitur talis est in homine conditio libertatis, aptis erat adju- 
mentis prsesidiisque munienda, qure cunctos ejus motus ad honum dirigerent, 
a malo retraherent : secus multum homini libertas nocuisset arbitrii. Ac 
primo quidem lex, hoc est agendorum atque omittendorum norma, fuit 
necessaria : quse quidem proprie nulla esse in animantibus potest, qui 
necessitate agunt, propterea quod quidquid agant, naturoe agunt impulsu, 


pulse of their nature, nor can they of themselves follow any other 
mode of action. But those beings that enjoy liberty, who can act 
or not act, act thus or thus, enjoy that liberty, because, only after 
the dictate of reason, in any given case, do they choose to 'act as 
they please. And by that dictate is laid down for them, not 
only what is naturally proper and what improper, but also what 
is the good that ought to be done, and the evil that ought to 
be avoided ; reason thus dictates to the will what it should select, 
what reject, in order that man may ultimately attain the end for 
which he was made. Ultimately to attain this end is the only 
(reasonable) motive for man's every action. Now this dictate of 
reason is called law. 

12. In man's free-will, then, is found the primary reason for 
the necessity of law, a rule, namely, to direct our wills to select 
only the reasonable. And nothing more awry or absurd could 
be said or imagined than is the thesis of those who claim that, 
because man has from nature free-will, freedom, he should not, 
therefore, be restricted by law. Were this so, it would follow that, 
to be free, it would be necessary to act contrary to reason ; whereas 
the very contrary is true, namely, that precisely because man is 
free is he bound to follow the* dictates of reason. This dictate of 
reason, law, is man's guide, and by its promise of reward or pun- 
ishment incites him to good, withholds him from evil. 

13. Such, and before all others, is the natural law. This is 

nee alium ullum sequi ex se possunt in agendo modum. Verum eorum, 
qui libertate fruuntur, ideo in potestate est agere, non agere, ita, vel 
secus, agere, quia turn, quod volunt, eligunt, cum antecessit illud quod 
diximus rationis judicium. Quo quidem judicio non modo statuitur quid 
honestum natura sit, quid turpe, sed etiam qnid bonum sit reque ipsa 
faciendum, quid malum reque ipsa vitandum ; ratio nimirum voluntati prae- 
scribit quid petere, et a quo debeat declinare, ut homo tenere summum 
finem suum aliquando possit, cujus caussa sunt omnia facienda. Jamvero 
haec ordinatio rationis lex nominatur. 

XII. Quamobrem cur homini lex necessaria sit, in ipso ejus libero arbitrio, 
scilicet in hoc, nostrae ut voluntates a recta ratione ne discrepent, prima 
est caussa, tamquam in radice, quaerenda. Nihilque tarn perversum prae- 
posterumque dici cogitarive posset quam -illud, hominem, quia natura liber 
est, idcirco esse oportere legis expertem ; quod si ita esset, hoc profecto 
consequeretur, necesse ad libertatem esse non cohaerere cum ratione : cum 
contra, longe verissimum sit, idciixo legi oportere subesse, quia est 
natura liber. Isto modo dux homini in asjendo lex est, eumdemque praemiis 
pcenisque propositis ad recte faciendum allicit, a peccando deterret. 

XIII. Talis est princeps omnium lex naturalis, quae scripta est et insculpta 


written, as it were, and stamped on the mind of every human 
being. It is in reality only man's natural reason ordering turn 
to act rightly and avoid sin. But this dictate of reason c6utd 
not so order and forbid with the authority of law, as it does, 
were it not simply the voice and interpreter to us of a higher 
reason that sanctions its dictates. To this higher reason man's 
reason should be subject, and through reason his mind and liberty. 
For, as it belongs to law to impose duties and define rights, all law 
must have authority for its basis, that authority, namely, which 
has the legitimate power to impose the duties and define the rights, 
and to sanction its behests with penalties and rewards. Now 
man would not be subject to this law of reason, it would not 
be for him, a law, were he supreme legislator to himself, deciding of 
himself what shall be for him right or wrong. It follows that 
this law of nature, innate in all who enjoy the reasoning faculty, 
and inclining them to perform the acts conducive to the end 
for which they were made, is the eternal law itself, the eternal reason 
of the Creator, God's ordinances for the government of the 

14. In addition to this law, ever dictating to man what is 
Tight and withholding him from sin, he has received through 
God's goodness certain other precious gifts, in themselves ad- 
mirably adapted for the strengthening and guidance of his will. 
Among these the principal one, the one that excels all others, 
is the efficacy of divine grace. Grace, by enlightening the mind, 
strengthening the will, and impelling it ever with tenacity of 
purpose to moral good, renders the use of man's natural liberty 
both readier and safer. It were very far from the truth to say 

'in hominum animis singulorum, quia ipsa est humana ratio recte facere 
jubens et peccare vetans. Ista vero humanse rationis pnescriptio vim ha- 
bere legis non potest, nisi quia altioris est vox atque interpres rationis, cui 
inentem libertatemque nostram subjectam esse oporteat. Vis enim legis cum 
ea sit, officia imponere et jura tribuere, tola in auctoritate nititur, hoc est 
in vera potestate statuendi officia describendique jura, item poenis prsemiis- 
que imperata sanciendi : quae quidem omnia in homine liquet esse non 
posse, si normam actionibus ipse suis summus sibi legislator daret. Ergo 
consequitur, ut naturae lex sit ipsa lex (zterna, insila in iis qui ratione 

utuntur, eosque inclinans ad debitum actnm et finem, eaque est ipsa seterna 

.ratio creatoris universumque mundum gubernantis Dei. 

XIV. Ad hanc agendi regulam peccandique frenos singularia quaedam 
prsesidia, Dei beneficio, adjuncta sunt, ad confirmandam hominis regendamque 

-voluntatem aptissima. In quibus princeps est atque excellit divinse virtus gra- 
tue ; quse cum mentem illustret, voluntatemque salutari constantia roboratam 


that by any action of God's grace man's voluntary impulses 
become less free. For, natural to man, and fully in har- 
mony with the action of his mind, is the action upon him of 
divine grace. Grace flows from the author of man's mind and 
will, and by that author all things are acted upon only in 
accordance with their natural attributes. Nay, divine grace, as 
the Angelic Doctor reminds us, from the very fact of its pro- 
ceeding from the author of nature, is of itself wonderfully well 
adapted to benefit all created things, and conserve the faculties, 
powers, and perfections which naturally they possess. 

15. What has been said of the liberty of individuals can be 
easily applied to the many, united in civil society. For, what 
reason and the natural law is to the individual, that, to civil 
society is human law, made and promulgated for the public 

1 6. Among human laws are found some regulating things that 
are, of their nature, good or bad for man. The former, they 
prescribe, the latter, prohibit, under penalty. Statutes of this kind 
have not the reason of their existence in the existence of society. 
For as society did not create human nature, it never rested with 
society to determine what things should accord or disaccord 
with human nature. These things were determined before society 
had existence and are to be sought in the natural law, and, 
therefore, in God's eternal law. When, therefore, we find precepts 

ad morale bonum semper impellat, expeditiorem efficit simulque tutiorem 
nativse libertatis usum. Ac longe est a veritate alienum, interveniente Deo, 
minus esse liberos motus voluntarios : nam intima in homine et cum 
natural! propensione congruens est divinre vis gratise, quia ab ipso et animi 
et voluntatis nostras auctore manat, a quo res omnes convenienter naturae 
suse moventur. Immo gratia divina, ut monet angelicus Doctor, ob hanc 
caussam quod a naturce opifice proficiscitur, mire nata atque apta est ad 
tuendas quasque naturas, conservandosque mores, vim, efficientiam singularum. 

XV. Quse vero de libertate singulorum dicta sunt, ea ad homines civili inter 
se societate conjunctos facile transferuntur. Nam quod ratio lexque naturalis 
in hominibus singulis, idem efficit in consociatis lex kumana ad bonum 
commune civium promulgata. 

XVI. Ex hominum legilms alice in eo versantur quod est bonum malumve 
natura, atque alterum sequi praecipiunt, alterum fugere, adjuncta sanctione 
debita. Sed istiusmodi decreta nequaquam ducunt ab hominum societate 
principium, quia societas sicut humanam naturam non ipsa genuit, ita 
pariter nee bonum procreat naturae conveniens, nee malum naturas dissen- 
taneum : sed potius ipsi hominum societati antecedunt, omninoque sunt a 
lege natural! ac propterea a lege aeterna repetenda. Juris igitur riaturalis 


of the natural law inscribed as statutes in human legislation, we 
must remember that these precepts have not only the force of 
human law, but principally that far higher and holier sanction 
derived from the law of nature and the eternal law of God. 
In regard to laws of this kind, the duty of the human legislator 
mainly consists in enforcing the natural law by a uniform regu- 
lation, in restraining the wicked, and those prone to be so, to 
the end that, deterred from evil courses, they may do aright, or 
at least be not harmful to the public. 

17. Other precepts of the civil law are found which have no 
obvious and immediate connection with the natural law, but 
which are derived from it nevertheless. Their connection with 
it is more remote and reached only by a process of reasoning. 
These laws prescribe various things specifically which the natural 
law commands or forbids not specifically, but only in a general 
way. Thus the natural law prescribes that all citizens should do 
their part in the furtherance of the peace and prosperity of their 
country. But what precisely each individual should do, when 
and how each one should act, is not defined by the natural 
law, but left to be settled by human legislation. Particular 
enactments in regard to matters of this kind, devised by human 
prudence, aud promulgated by lawful authority, constitute what 
is properly called human law. And this human law, specifying 
things prescribed, though only in a general way, by the natural, 
authoritatively requires all citizens to obey it for the sake of 
the end proposed, and forbids its violation : and as far as it is 

praecepta, hominum comprehensa legibus, non vim solum habent legis 
humanae, sed prsecipue illud multo altius multoque augustius complectuntur 
imperium, quod ab ipsa lege naturae et a lege seterna proficiscitur. Et in 
isto genere legum hoc fere civilis legumlatoris munus est, obedientes facere 
cives, communi disciplina adhibita, pravos et in vitia promptos coercendo, ut 
a malo deterriti, id quod rectum est consectentur, aut saltern offensioni 
noxaeque ne sint civitati. 

XVII. Alia vero civilis potestatis praescripta non ex natural! jure statim et 
proxime, sed longius et oblique consequuntur resque varias definiunt, de 
quibus non est nisi generatim atque universe natura cautum. Sic suam 
conferre operam cives ad tranquillitatem prosperitatemque publicam natura 
jubet : quantum operae, quo pacto, quibus in rebus, non natura sed hominum 
sapientia constituitur. Jamvero peculiaribus hisce vivendi regulis prudenti 
ratione inventis, legitimaque potestate propositis, lex humana proprii nominis 
continetur. Quae quidem lex ad finem communitati propositum cives universes 
conspirare jubet, deflectere prohibet: eademque, quatenus pedisequa et con- 
sentiens est prsescriptionibus naturae, ducit ad ea quse honesta sunt, a con- 


subservient to, and in accord with, the precepts of the natural 
law, it leads to virtue, restrains from sin. From all which it 
will be seen that the law of liberty and liberty's bounds ultima- 
tely rest on God's eternal law, and not only the liberty of the 
individual, but also the liberty of nations and communities. 
1 8. Therefore civil liberty, properly so called, does not consist 
in freedom for each individual to do as he please. From this 
nothing but anarchy and confusion could result, and the ruin of 
the state. Civil liberty rather consists in the boon furnished by 
the civil laws to the individual, whereby he can with greater 
ease live according to the precepts of the eternal law. And the 
liberty of rulers does not consist in freedom rashly to enact at caprice 
what laws they choose, a thing that would be outrageous, be- 
sides being ruinous to the country, but to enact- laws that will 
commend themselves to all, owing to their being evidently 
modelled on the eternal law, and which will contain nothing 
not virtually contained already in that eternal law, the founda- 
tion of all legislation. With great wisdom St. Augustine wrote : 
At the same time I think you see that there is nothing just or lawful 
in that temporal law that men had not gathered for themselves from 
this eternal law. If an enactment, therefore, of any ruler .be 
contrary to reason and injurious to the public weal, it has 
not the force of law, because it would not be a rule of right, 
and would tend to withdraw men from that good for the 

furtherance of which society exists. 

1 ~ 

trariis deterret. Ex quo intelligitur. omnino in seterna Dei lege normam et 

regulam positam esse libertatis, nee singulorum dumtaxat hominum, sed etiam 
communitatis et conjunctionis humanas. 

XVIII. Igitur in hominum societate libertas veri nominis non est in eo posita 
ut agas quod lubet, ex quo vel maxima existeret turba et confusio in 
oppressionem civitatis evasura, sed in hoc, ut per leges civiles expeditius 
possis secundum legis seternae prrescripta vivere. Eorum vero qui praesunt 
non in eo sita libertas est, ut imperare temere et ad libidinem queant, quod 
pariter flagitiosum esset et cum summa etiam reipublicoe pernicie conjunctum, 
sed humanarum vis legum htec debet esse, ut ab seterna lege manare 
intelligantur, nee quidquam sancire quod non in ea, veluti in principio 
universi juris, contineatur. Sapientissime Augustinus : L " Simid etiam te 
videre atbitror, in ilia temporali (lege) nihil esse justum atque legitimum 
quod non ex hac (Zlerna (lege) sibi homines derivarint." Si quid igitur 
ab aliqua potestate sanciatur, quod a principiis rectse rationis dissideat, sitque 
reipublicne perniciosum, vim legis nullam haberet, quia nee regula justitiffi 
esset, et homines a bono cui nata societas est, abduceret. 
- ! De Lib. Arbitrio, Lib. I, c. 6, n. 15. 


19. Under whatever aspect, then, human liberty be regarded, 
whether as enjoyed by individuals, or by communities, by the 
governing or by the governed, it ever involves the idea of sub- 
mission to a supreme and eternal rule of reason, and this rule 
is simp 1 }' the authority of God, commanding this, forbidding that. 
And so far from this moat reasonable dominion of God doing 
away with, or in any wise diminishing, human liberty, it only 
protects and perfects it. For the true perfection of all natures 
is to tend to and attain their proper end. But the supreme end 
to which human liberty should aspire, is Gsd. 

20. These maxims of the highest and truest wisdom are know- 
able even by the light of reason alone. Instructed by the ex- 
ample and precepts of her divine founder, the Church always 
taught, always' asserted these truths. On the principles they in- 
volve she invariably acted herself, and never ceased to impress 
those principles on Christian nations. In the matter of morals 
the gospel laws not only far excel all the teaching of heathen 
wisdom, but they invite and lead man to a height of sanctity 
undreamt of by the ancients, and, by bringing him nearer to 
God, render him capable of a higher degree of liberty. 

21. And, acting up to her teaching, great in every age was 
seen to be the influence of the Church in maintaining and 
advancing the civil and political liberties of the people. There 
is no need of recounting her merits in this matter. Let it 

XIX. Natura igitur libeftatis humanse, quocumque in genere consideretur, 
tarn in personis singulis quam in consociatis. nee minus in iis qui imperant 
quam in iis qui parent, necessitatem complectitur obtemperandi summae 
cuidam reternaeque rationi, quse nihil est aliud nisi auctoritas jubentis, 
vetantis Dei. Atque hoc justissimum in homines imperium Dei tantum 
abest ut libertatem tollat aut ullo modo diminuat. ut potius tueatur ac 
perficiat. Suum quippe finem consectari et as>eqni, omnium naturarum 
est vera perfectio : supremus autem finis, quo libertas aspirare debet hu- 
mana, Deus est. 

XX. Hsec verissimse altissimseque prcecepta doctrinre, vel solo nobis 
lumine rationis cognita, Ecclesia quidem exemplis doctrinaque divini Auctoris 
sui erudiia passim propagavit, asseruit : quibns ipsis et munus suum metiri 
et Christianas informare gentes nunquam destitit. In genere morum leges 
envangelicse non solum omni ethnicorum sapientioe longissime prasstant, sed 
plane vocant hominem atque instituunt ad inaudi'am veteribus sanctitatem, 
effectumque propriorem Deo sinful efficiunt perfectioris compotem libertatis. 

XXI. Ita semper permagna vis Ecclesise apparuit in custodienda tuendaque 
civili et politica libertate populorum. Ejus in hoc genere enumerare meri- 
ta nihil attinet. Satis est commemorare servitutem, vetus illud ethnicarum 


suffice to note that slavery, the disgrace of pagan nations, was 
abolished, mainly through her operation and influence. Equal 
rights and the true brotherhood of man were first preached by 
Jesus Christ. The Apostle only echoed the Master's words 
when he preached that there is no longer Jew, nor Greek, nor 
barbarian, nor Scythian, but that all are brothers in Christ. 
So great and so universally recognized is the civilizing power of 
the Church, it is well known that wheresoever she gains a foot- 
hold, barbarism cannot long survive ; urbanity will soon take 
the place of savagery ; and the darkness of barbarism will be 
dispelled by the light of truth. Nor did the Church ever cease 
to benefit civilized nations as well; by her resistance to arbi- 
trary power, by her defence of the innocent and the t feeble from 
injustice and oppression, and by using her influence to so shape 
legislation that the government would be patriotically loved by the 
citizens and feared on account of its power by foreign nations. 
22. Further, it is a duty undeniable en the part of citizens 
to respect authority and obey just laws. On the enforcement 
and vigilance of the laws all depend for protection, and, in case 
of injury, for satisfaction. Lawful power is from God, and 
whoso resisteth thai power resisteth the ordinance of God. Obedience 
is greatly ennobled when yielded to an authority most just, most 
high. But where the right to command is wanting, or the 
command is contrary to reason, the eternal law, or to a command 
of God, it is proper not to obey, men, namely, rather than God, 

gentium dedecus, opera maxima beneficioque Ecclesiae deletam. ^Equabilita- 
tem juris, veramque inter homines germanitatem primus omnium Jesus 
Christus asseruit : cui apostolorum suorum resonuit vox, non esse Judaeum, 
neque Grsecum, neque barbarum, neque Scytham, sed omnes in Christo 
fratres. Tanta est in hac parte tamque cognita Ecclesise virtus, ut quibus- 
cumque in oris vestigium ponat, exploratum sit, agrestes mores permanere 
diu non posse: sed immanitati mansuetudinem, barbarioe tenebris lumen 
veritatis brevi successurum. Item populos civili urbanitate excultos magnis 
afficere beneficiis nullo tempore Ecclesia desiit, vel resistendo iniquorum ar- 
bitrio, vel propulsandis a capite innocentium et tenuiorum injuriis, vel demum 
opera danda ut rerum publicarum ea constitutio valeret, quam cives propter 
sequitatem adamarent, extern! propter potentiam metuerent. 

XXII. Prseterea verissimum officium est vereri auctoritatem, justisque legi- 
bus obedienter subesse : quo fit ut virtute virgilantiaque legum ab injuria 
improborum cives vindicentur. Potestas legitima a Deo est, et qui polestati 
resistit, Dei ordinationi tesistit : quo modo multum obedientia adipiscitur 
nobilititis, cum justissimce altissimaeque auctoritati adhibeatur. Verum ubi 
imperandi jus abest, vel si quidquam praecipiatur rationi, legi seternae, im- 


All approach to tyranny being thus cut off, the government 
cannot seize control of everything : the rights of individual 
citizens, of the family, of every member of the republic, will 
remain secure, each enjoying that degree of true liberty which 
consists, as we have shown, in this, that each one can lead a 
life in accordance with law and right reason. 

23. If. when people talk of liberty, they meant legitimate, 
honorable liberty, such as we have described and reason indicates, 
no one would have the hardihood to decry the Church so 
wrongfully as they do, on the pretence that she is opposed to 
individual liberty, and likewise to liberal governments. But in 
imitation of Lucifer, many now-a-days take for their motto the 
impious wor^p, Kon serviam. These, under the name of liberty, 
wish only for absurd, sheer licence. These are adherents of 
that party, now so numerous and influential, which assumed its 
party name from the word Liberty the self styled Liberals. 

24. What Naturalists and Rationalists are in philosophy, these 
Liberals are in regard to morals and civil life. The principles 
laid down by the philosophical naturalists are carried into practice 
by the Liberals. The great tenet of rationalism is the supremacy 
of human reason. Holding to the supremacy of human reason, 
rationalists refuse to render to the divine, eternal reason the 
obedience due it. They claim complete independence for 
human reason, and contend that it is the principle, and source, 

perio Dei contrarium, rectum est non parere, scilicet hominibus, ut Deo pa- 
reatur. Sic prtecluso ad tyrannidem aditu, non omnia pertrahet ad se prin- 
cipatus ; sua sunt salva jura singulis civibus, sua societati domesticse, cunc- 
tisque reipublicse membris, data omnibus verce copia libertatis, quas in eo 
est, quemadmodum demonstravimus, ut quisque possit secundum leges rec- 
tamque rationem vivere. 

XXIII. Quod si, cum de libertate vulgo disputant, legitimam honestamque 
intelligerent, qualem modo ratio oratioque descripsit, exagitare Ecclesiam ne- 
mo auderet propter illud quod per summam injuriam ferunt, vel singulorum 
libertati, vcl liberoe reipublicse esse inimicam. Sed jam permulti Luciferum 
imitati, cujus est ilia nefaria vox, Non serviam, libertatis nomine absurdam 
quamdam consectantur et meracam licentiam. Cujusmodi sunt ex ilia tarn 
late fusa tamque pollenti dlsciplina homines, qui se, ducto a libertate nomine, 
Liberates appellari volunt. 

XXIV. Revera quo spectant in philosophia Naturalistcc, seu Rationalists, 
eodem in re morali ac civili spectant Liberalismi fautores, qui posita a 
Naturalises principia in mores actionemque vitae deducunt. Jamvero totius 
Rationalismi humanre principatus rationis caput est': quse obedientiam divi- 
nae aeternaeque rat : oni debitam recusans, suique se juris esse decernens, 


and ultimate criterion of all truth. In the same way the 
followers of liberalism contend that in practical life, there is no 
divine power which they are bound to obey, but that each 
individual is a law unto himself. Hence arises that moral 
philosophy which they designate independent, and which, under 
pretence of liberty, claims that the human will is not bound to 
obey the divine precepts, and allows unlimited license in morals. 
25. In what such teaching must result, especially for 
society, it is easy to see. For, once the principle is laid down 
and accepted that man has no superior, it follows that the obliga- 
tions of domestic or civil life are not derived from any source 
outside of, or superior to, man, but depend entirely on the will 
of each individual ; that the people are the primary source of 
all public power ; and, besides, that, as each one's own opinion 
is to be for him his only guide in private life, so for affairs 
of a public nature the will of the multitude is alone to be 
considered. Hence that a majority can do anything, and that 
the majority, because the majority, creates all rights ar.d duties. 
26. The absurdity of all this is plain from what we have said. 
And surely, to wish that man or civil society should not be 
bound in any way to look up to God their creator, and conse- 
quently the supreme legislator over all, is repugnant to nature; 
nor is such a conception repugnant in man's case only : it is, 

ipsa sibi sola efficitur summum principium et fons et judex veritatis. 
Ita illi, quos diximus, Libsralisini sectatores in actione vitae nullam coii- 
tendunt esse, cui parendum sit, divinam potestatem, sed sibi quemque 
esse legem : unde ea philosophia morum gignitur, quam Independeniem 
vocant, quse sub specie liberlatis ab observnntia divinorum praeceptorum 
voluntatem removens, infinitam licentiam solet homini dare. 

XXV. Quae omnia in hominum pnesertim societate quo tandem evadant, 
facile est pervidere. Hoc enim fixo et persuaso, homini antistare nemi- 
nem, consequitur caussam efficientem conciliationis civilis et societatis non 
in principio aliquo extra aut supra hominem posito, sed in libera voluntate 
singulorum esse quoerendam : potestatem publicam a multitudine velut a 
primo fonte repetendam, praecereaque, sicut ratio singulorum sola dux et 
norma agendi privatim est singulis, ita universorum esse oportere universis 
in rerum genere publicnrum. Hinc plurimum posse plurimos : partemque 
populi majorem universi juris esse officiique effectricem. 

XXVI. Sed haec cum ratione pugnare, ex eis quae dicta sunt apparet. Nul- 
lum siquidem velle homini aut societati civili cum Deo creatore ac proinde 
supremo omnium legislatore interceclere vinclum, omnino naturae repugnat, 
nee naturae hominis tantum, sed rerum omnium procreatarum : quia res 
omnes effectas cum caussa, a qua effectse sunt, aliquo esse aptas nexu 


in regard to all created things ; for between things made and 
their maker there is always a necessary relation One thing 
befits every nature and pertains to its perfection to remain in 
that place and rank where the natural order of things placed 
it ; hence what is inferior should be subject to and obey what 
is superior. 

27. Besides, the principles of this independent philosophy are most 
injurious, both to individuals and to the State. For, if man's reason 
be made the sole and ultimate criterion of truth and error, 
all real difference between good and evil is denied. Not in reality, 
but only according to the views and opinions of individuals, do 
good deeds differ from bad. Whatever a person likes, is thereby 
lawful. With the acceptance of these notions of morality, 
which have scarcely any power to repress and subdue the 
passions, full sway is given to every manner of vice. In political 
affairs power is separated from its true and natural principle, 
whence it derives all its usefulness for the public good. What 
shall be permitted or prohibited by law, is left entirely to the 
decision of the majority of the citizens. This is apt to lead to 
tyranny. When God's dominion over man and human society is 
rejected public worship will, of course, be abolished, and utter indif- 
ference as to all that concerns religion will prevail. The people, 
possessed by the idea of their sovereignty, will easily be incited 
to riot and revolt. When the restraints of duty and conscience 
are cast aside, nothing remains but brute force ; and brute force 

necesse est : omnibusque naturis hoc convenit, hoc ad perfectionem singula- 
rum pertinet, eo se continere loco et gradu, quern naturalis ordo postulat, 
scilicet ut ei quod superius est, id quod est inferius subjiciatur et pareat. 
XXVII. Sed pneterea est hujusmodi doctiina turn privatis hominibus turn 
civiiatibus maxime perniciosa. Sane rejecto ad humanam rationem et solam 
et unam veri bonique arbitrio, proprium tollitur boni et mali discrimen; 
turpia ab honestis non re, sed opinione judicioque singulorum differunt : 
quod libeat, idem licebit ; constitutaque morum disciplina, cujus ad coer- 
cendos sedandosque motus animi turbidos nulla fere vis est, sponte fiet ad 
omnem vitse corrupielam aditus. In rebus autem publicis, potestas imperandi 
separatur a vero naturalique principio, unde omnem haurit virtutem efficien- 
tem boni communis : lex, de iis quae facienda fugiendave sunt statuens, 
majoris multitudinis permittitur arbitrio, quod quidem est iter ad tyrannicam 
dominationem proclive. Imperio Dei in hominem hominumque societatem 
repudiatio, consentaneum est nullam esse publice religionem, rerumque 
omnium qure ad religionem referantur, incuria maxima consequetur. Simili- 
ter opinione principatus armata, facile ad seditionem turbasque labitur 
multitudo, frenisque officii et conscientise sublatis, nihil proeter vim relin- 


by itself is not sufficient to keep a populace in order. Proof 
enough of this is seen in the continuous struggles of governments 
with the socialists and kindred societies, whose aim is the 
destruction of the social edifice. Let fair-minded men judge 
for themselves and say whether doctrines of this kind are calcu- 
lated to beget true liberty, liberty worthy of man, or rather to 
abuse and destroy it entirely. 

28. The doctrines, for their very savagery, are dreadful. On 
their very face they are untrue. We have seen to what excesses 
they have led. It is true that all who call themselves liberals 
do not subscribe to those opinions. Nay, many freely admit 
and openly maintain that the liberty which outrages the laws of 
truth and justice is wrong, is license : they say that it should 
be ruled and guided by right reason, and should, consequently, 
be in accord with the natural and eternal law. But here they 
stop. They insist, that free man cannot be fettered by any law 
of God not made known to him by his own reason, as are the 
natural and eternal law. 

29. In arguing thus they are certainly inconsistent. For, if 
they admit, what no one can reasonably deny, that man should 
obey the creator's laws, because he depends wholly upon God and 
was made for God, they must logically admit that no man can 
dictate modes and limits to God's legislating authority, without, 

quitur ; quse tamen vis tanti non est, ut populares cupiditates continere 
sola possit. Quod satis testatur dimicatio propemodum quotidiana contra 
Socialistas, aliosque seditiosorum greges, qui funditus permovere civitates diu 
moliuntur. Statuant igitur ac definiant rerum asqui aestimatores, tales, 
doctrinoe proficiant ad veram dignamque homine libertatem, an potius ipsam 
pervertant totamque corrumpant. 

XXVIII. Certe quidem opinionibus iis vel ipsa immanitate sua formidolosis 
quas a veritate aperte abhorrere, easdemque malortim maximorum caussas 
esse vidimus, non omnes Liberalismi fautores assentiuntur. Quin compulsi 
veritatis viribus, plurcs eorum haud verentur fateri, immo etiam ultro 
affirmant, in vitio esse et plane in licentiam cadere libertatem, si gerere se 
intemperantius ausit, veritate justitiaque posthabita: quocirca regendam 
gubernandamque recta ratione esse, et quod consequens est, juri naturali 
sempiternreque legi divinse subjectum esse oportere. Sed hie consistendum 
rati, liberum hominem subesse negant debere legibus, quas imponere Deus 
velit, alia praeter rationem naturalem via. 

XXIX. Id cum dicunt sibi minime cohserenr. Etenim si est, quod ipsi 
consentiunt nee dissentire potest jure quisquam, si est Dei legislators obe- 
diendum voluntati, quia totus homo in potestate est Dei et ad Deum tendit, 
consequitur posse neminem auctoritati ejus legiferae fines modumve 


by the very fact, refusing the obedience due. Should the human 
mind arrogate to itself the power to determine what, and to 
what extent, are God's rights and man's duties, its submission 
to the divine laws would be more apparent than real, and its 
own will would be set up over God's authority and Providence. 

30. Our constant rule of life, then, should be formed, not 
only on the eternal law, but equally so on each and every 
law which an all-wise, all-powerful God has seen fit to make, 
when these laws can be ascertained without any danger of 
mistake. And the more so, since these laws, having the same 
principle and author as the eternal law, must absolutely agree 
with the law of reason, and they but simply complete the 
natural law. These laws concern the truth of God, who, to 
prevent our intellect or will from falling into error, condescends 
himself, through the medium of these laws, to direct both. Let 
those things, then, remain inviolably and inseparably united, 
which, for the rest, neither can nor should be disunited, and, 
in all things, let us submit humbly and reverently to the 
almighty God. 

31. More moderate, but none the less inconsistent, are those who 
admit that in private life men should be governed by the divine 
laws, but, say they, it is different in affairs of state. In these, God's 
laws can be disregarded, nor need any account be taken of them in 
framing national legislation. From this position flows that per- 

praescribere, quin hoc ipso facial contra obedientiam debitam. Immo vero 
si tamum sibi mens arrogarit humana, ut, quce et quanta sint turn Deo 
jura turn sibi officia velit ipsa decernere, verecundiam legum divinarum 
plus retinebit specie quam re, et arbitrium ejus valebit prse auctoritate ac 
providentia Dei. 

XXX. Necesse est igitur, vivendi normam constanter religioseque, ut a 
lege ffiterna, ita ab omnibus singulisque petere legibus, quas infinite sapiens 
infinite potens Deus, qua sibi rati.ine visum est, tradidit, quasque nosse tuto 
possumus perspicuis nee ullo modo addubitandis notis. Eo vel magis quod 
istius generis leges, quoniam idem habent, quod lex ceterna, principium, 
eumdemque auctorem, omnino et cum ratione concordant et perfectionem 
adjungunt ad naturale jus : esedemque magisterium Dei ipsius complectuntur, 
qui scilicet, nostra ne mens neu voluntas in errorem labatur, nutu ductuque 
suo ulramque benigne regit. Sit igitur sancte inviolateque conjuncture, quod 
nee dijungi potest nee debet, omnibusque in rebus, quod ipsa naturalis 
ratio prsecipit, obnoxie Deo obedienterque serviatur. 

XXXI. Mitiores aliquanto sunt, sed nihilo sibi magis constant, qui ajunt 
nutu legum divinarum dirigendam utique vitam ac mores esse privatorum, 
non tamen civitatis : in rebus publicis fas esse a jussis Dei .discedere, nee 


nicious error that Church and State should be dissociated. How 
absurd all this is can be easily understood. Nature itself pro- 
claims that it is the duty of the State to furnish citizens every 
means and opportunity for leading honorable lives, lives in ac- 
cordance with the laws of God, the source of all virtue and 
honor. This being so, is it not contrary to common sense to say 
that the state need not care what laws it makes, or is free to 
make bad ones ? 

32. Again, government owes it to the public to provide by 
sensible legislation, not only for the material needs and con- 
veniences of the people, but still more for their intellectual 
wants ; and nothing can be conceived better adapted to meet 
these wants than the laws of God. Consequently, rulers who take 
no account of these divine laws, only abuse their political power and 
turn it from its legitimate and natural aim. But a matter of 
greater importance, and one to which we have more than once called 
attention, is that, although the immediate purposes of Church and 
State are not the same, and both pursue different paths towards 
their goal ; yet in the exercise of their respective functions one 
must often come face to face with the other. Both exercise juris- 
diction over the same persons. Both must often deal with the 
self-same cases, though not of course from the same standpoint. 
In such case any real conflict between the two jurisdictions it 
would be absurd to suppose. The supposition would be deroga- 

ad ea ullo modo in comlendis legibus intueri. Ex quo perniciosum illud 
gignitur consectarium, civitatis Ecclesixque rationes dissociari opportere. 
Sed heec quam absurde dicantur, haud difficulter intelligitur. Cum enim 
clamet ipsa natura, oportere civihus in societate suppetere copias opportuni- 
tatesque ad vitam honeste, scilicet secundum Dei leges, degendam, quia 
Deus est omnis honestatis justiticeque principium, profecto illud vehementer 
repugnat, posse iisdem de legibus nihil curare, vel etiam quidquam infense 
statuere civitatem. 

XXXII. Deinde qui populo pnesunt, hoc omnino rei publicoe debent, 
ut non solum commodis et rebus externis, - sed maxime animi bonis, 
legum sapientia, consulant. Atqui ad istorum incrementa bonorum ne 
cogitari quidem potest quidquam iis legibus aptius, quse Deum habeant 
auctorem : ob eamque rem qui in regendis civitatibus nolunt divinarum 
legum haberi rationem, aberrantem faciunt ab institute- suo et a prsescrip- 
tione naturae politicam potestatem. Sed quod magis interest, quodque alias 
Nosmetipsi, nee semel, monuimus, quamvis principatus civilis non eodem 
quo sacer, proxime spectet, nee iisdem eat itineribus-, in potestate tamen, 
gerenda obviam esse interdum alteri alter necessario debet. Est enim 
utriusque in eos lem imperium, nC raro fit, ut iisdem de rebus uterque, 


tory to divine wisdom, which created both. There must, therefore, 
necessarily exist some mode and means by which both may woik 
together without clash cf collision. The harmonious working of the 
two powers, the spiritual and the temporal, has been not inaptly 
likened to the working of the soul and the body. The union 
and harmony between them produces good results for each; 
whereas disunion is ruinous, especially to the body. For by it, the 
body's very life is lost. 

33. For the better understanding of the previous paragraphs we 
shall consider separately some of the kinds of liberty claimed 
nowadays. And first, as applicable to individuals, we shall consider 
the so-called Liberty of worship, which is so contrary to the virtue 
of religion. Its fundamental principle is this : Every person is 
free to profess any or no religion as he chooses. On the con- 
trary, of all man's duties the highest and holiest is un- 
doubtedly that of worshipping God with filial piety. This neces- 
sarily follows from the fact that we are in constant dependence 
on God, who in his power and his providence continually cares 
for us. He gave us being, and to him we ought to return. 

34. Besides that, there can be no true virtue without religion. 
Moral virtue shapes men's actions towards God as their final end 
and supreme good. Religion, then, which is the actual performance 
of those acts which are done directly and immediately in God's honor, ' 

etsi non eadem ratione, decernat. Id quotiescumque usuveniat, cum con- 
fligere absurdum sit, sapientissimreque voluntati Dei aperte repugnet, 
quemdam esse modum atque ordinem necesse est, ex quo, caussis conten- 
tionum certationumque subla:is, ratio concors in agendis rebus existat. Et 
hujusmodi concordiam non inepte similem conjunction! dixere, quae animum 
inter et corpus intercedit, idque commodo utriusque partis : quarum distractio 
nominatim est perniciosa corpori, quippe cujus vita extinguit. 

XXXIII. Quse quo melius appareant, varia libertatis incremenla, quae nostrae 
quaesita aetati, feruntur, separatim considerari oportet. Ac primo illud in 
singulis personis videamus, quod est tantopere virtuti religionis contranum, 
scilicet de liberlate, uti loquuntur, cultus. Quae hoc est veluti fundamento 
constituta, integrum cuique esse, aut quam libuerit, aut omnino nullam 
profiteri religionem. Contra vero ex omnibus hominum officiis illud est 
sine dubitatione maximum ac sanctissimum, quo pie religioseque Deuin 
colere homines jubemur. Idque necessario ex eo consequitur, quod in 
Dei potestate perpetuo sumus, Dei numine providentiaque gubernamur, ab 
eoque profecti, ad eum reverti debemus. 

XXXIV. Hue accedit, virtufem veri nonv'nis nullam esse sine religione posse: 
virtus enim moralis est, cujus officia versantur in iis, quce ducunt ad 

1 S. Th., 2. 2., q. 81, a. 6. 


must be of all others the principal and ruling virtue. And if it be 
asked, which among the many conflicting religions advocated must we 
embrace ? reason and nature answer : That, which God bids us to. 
And which that is, can be easily recognized. For, in a matter of 
such moment, to prevent men being led into error which 
might lead to irreparable ruin, divine providence has distinguished 
that religion from all others by certain visible characteristics. Now, to 
leave man free to profess any or no religion, would be to allow 
him to pervert or neglect the holiest of his duties, and desert the 
unchangeable good for evil. This, as we have said, would not be ' 
liberty, but a corruption of liberty, and the enslavement to sin of 
a debased spirit. 

35. By freedom of worship in r expect to nations, is meant that 
as nations they need pay God no worship or perform any 
acts of religion ; that no form of religion is to be favored 
before another, but all to have the same rights : and this even 
where the people profess Catholicity. Now, if these principles be 
correct, either the duties of society to Gcd are nothing, or 
these duties can be neglected with impunity. But both sup- 
positions are evidently false. There can be no doubt that civil 
society exists as such by the direct will of God, whether we 
consider its component parts, or its formal basis, authority, or 
its purpose, or the many benefits it confers on mankind. It 

Deum, quatenus homini est summum atque ultimum bonorum ; ideoque 
religio quse operatur ea, qua: directe et immediate ordinantur in honorcrn 
divinum : cunctarum princeps est moderatrixque virtutum. Ac si quse- 
ratur, cum plures et inter se dissidentes usurpentur religiones, quam 
sequi unam ex omnibus necesse sit, earn certe ratio et natura respondent, 
quam Deus jusserit, quam ipsam facile homines queant notis quibusdam 
exterioribus agnoscere, quibus earn distinxisse divina providentia voluit quia 
in re tanti momenti summte errorum ruinae essent consecuturce. QuapropU-r 
oblata ilia, de qua loquimur, libertate, h<ec homini potestas tribuitur, ut 
officium sanctissimum impune pervertat vel deserat, ideoque ut aversus ab 
incommutabili bono sese ad malum convertat : quod, sicut diximus, non 
libertas sed depravatio libertatis est, et abjecti in peccatum animi servitus. 
XXXV. Eadem libertas si consideretur in civitatibus, hoc sane vult, nihil 
esse quod ullum Deo cultum civitas adhibeat aut adhiberi publice velit : nullum 
anteferri alteri, sed eequo jure omnes haberi oportere, nee habita ratione 
populi, si populus catholicum profit eatur nomen. Quas ut recta essent, 
verum esse opporteret, civilis hominum communitatis officia adversus Deum 
aut nulla esse, aut impune solvi posse : quod est utrumque aperte falsum. 
Etenim dubitari non potest quin sit Dei voluntate inter homines conjuno 

1 S. Th., 2a 23e, qu. 81, a. 6. 


was God who formed man a social being and placed him in the 
society of his kind, that in association with his fellows he may 
be able to procure what his nature requires, but which, solitary 
and alone, he could not. Wherefore civil society, as such, 
must acknowledge that God is its parent and author, and should 
therefore respect and reverence his power and sovereign domin- 
ion. Justice, then, as well as reason, deny the right of any 
nation to be atheistical, or, which is the same thing, to be 
equally indifferent to all forms of worship and give all and 
each the same rights. 

36. As the State, then, should profess some form of religion, 
it should profess that form which alone is true. This can 
be easily recognized, especially in Catholic countries, by evi- 
dent characteristics of its truth. Rulers should preserve and 
foster this religion if they wish, as in duty bound, to further 
the welfare of the people. Only for the good of the governed, 
does government exist. And although the immediate object of 
secular government is the material prosperity of the people, yet, 
in futhering that, it should not lessen, but rather increase, eich 
individual's means of attaining that ultimate and supreme good 
wherein man's eternal happiness consists ; and this good, man 
can never attain without the practice of religion. 

37. But on this subject we have elsewhere spoken at length. 

ta societas, sive panes, sive forma ejus spectetur quce est auctontas, sive 
csiussa, sive earum, quas homini parit, magnarum utilitatum copia. Deus 
est, qui hominem ad congregationem genuit atque in ccetu sui similium 
collocavit, ut quod natura ejus desideraret, nee ipse assequi solitarius 
potuisset, in consociatione reperiret. Quamobrem Deum civilis societas, 
quia societas est, parentem et auctorem suum agnoscat necesse est, atque 
ejus potestatem dominatumque vereatur et colat. Vetat igitur justitia, vetat 
ratio atheam esse, vel, quod in atheismum recideret, erga varias, ut lo- 
quuntur, religiones pari modo affectam civitatem, eademque singulis jure 
promiscue largiri. 

XXXVI. Cum igitur sit unius religionis necessaria in civitate professio, 
profited earn oportet quce unice vera est, quseque non difficulter, prscsertim 
in civitatibus catholicis, agnoscitur, cum in ea tanquam insignitae notse veri- 
tatis appareant. Itaque hanc, qui rempublicam gerunt, conservent, hanc tue- 
antur, si volunt prudenter atque utiliter ut debent civium communitati con- 
sulere. Fublica enim potestas propter eorum qui reguntur utilitatem consli- 
tuta est : et quamquam hoc proxime special, deducere cives ad hujus, quse in 
terris degitur, vitse prospentalem, tamen non minuere sed augere homini debet 
facultatem adipiscendi summum illud atque extremum bonorum, in quo felicitas 
hominum sempiterna ccnsistit : quo perveniri non potest religione neglecta. 


At present let it suffice to say, that the liberty in question 
does no little injury to the true liberty, both of the governing 
and the governed, while religion does much in its favor. Re- 
ligion, teaching that all power is from God, gravely admonishes 
rulers of their obligations, admonishes them to do nothing 
unjust or, but to govern with mildness, and with 
kindness almost parental. At the same time, it admonishes the 
people that they are to be subject to those in power, who, 
in the exercise of that power, are the ministers of God. It 
wishes the relation of citizens to the authorities to be not 
merely that of obedience, but of respect and confidence. It 
prohibits sedition and all movements that would disturb the public 
peace. These movements only result in a tightening of the reins of 
government and a diminution of the citizens' liberties. We pass 
over, how greatly religion conduces to morality, and morality, in its 
turn, to liberty. For reason shows, and history proves, that the 
more moral peoples are,' the more they enjoy of libeity, wealth, 
and power. 

38. We shall now briefly consider Liberty of Speech and Liberty 
of the Press. It is needless to say that neither can be claimed 
as a right, if not used with moderation, but allowed to overstep 
all reasonable bounds. Not as a right : for a right is the possession 
of a moral power. It would be absurd to suppose that nature 
conferred this power equally and alike on truth and falsehood, 

XXXVII. Sed htec alias uberius exposuimus : in prsesentia id animadvert! 
tan turn volumus, i^tiusmodi libertatem valde obesse verse cum eorum qui re- 
gunt, turn qui regimtur, libertati. Prodest autem mirifice religio. quippe qute 
primum ortum potestatis a Deo ipso repetit, gravissimeque principes iubet, 
officiorum suorum esse memores, nihil injuste acerbeve imperare, benigae ac 
fere cum caritate paterna populo prseesse. Eadem potestati legitimae cives 
vult esse subjectos, ut Dei ministris ; eosque cum rectoribus reipublicse non 
obedientia soluin, sed verecundia et amore conjungit, interdictis seditionibus, 
cunctisque incoeptis quce ordinem tranquillitatemque publicam perturbare qtie- 
ant, quaeque tandem caussam afferunt cur majoribus frenis libertas civium 
constringatur. Prsetermittimus quantum religio bonis moribus conducat et 
quantum libertati mores boni. Nam ratio ostendit, et historia confirmat, quo 
sint melius moratae, eo plus libertate et opibus et imperio valere civitates. 1 

XXXVIII. Jam aliquid consideretur de libertale loquendi, formisque litter- 
arum quodcumque libeat exprimendi. Hujusprofecto non modice temperate sed 
modum et finem transeuntis libertatis jus esse non posse, vix attinet dicere. 
Est enim jus facultas moralis, quam, ut diximus, scepiusque est dicendum, 
absurdum est existimare, veritati et mendncio, honestati et turpitudini promi- 

1 S. Th. 2a 23e, qu. 8l, a. 6. 


virtue and vice. This we have said before, but it must be insisted 
on again and again. With due regard to the suggestions of 
prudence, the truth may be freely spread and virtuous deeds may 
be spoken of. The more these reach the better. But lying 
theories, than which there is no greater mental plague, and vices 
which corrupt the heart and corrupt the morals, these ought to 
be actively restrained by public authority, so as to protect the 
people from their noxious contagion. Abuse of intellectual power 
is really a moral cruelty to those on whom it is brought to bear: 
The public authorities have no less a right to prevent the inflic- 
tion of this moral cruelty than they have to prevent the infliction 
of physical cruelty on the weak. And the more so, because the 
people, for the most part, are not capable of extricating their minds 
from the meshes of wily argument and sophistry, or, at least, cannot 
do so without great difficulty. This is particularly the case, when 
the arguments fall in with their inclinations. If every one get 
unlimited license to say and publish what he choose, nothing 
will remain sacred or inviolate, not even those sovereign and 
evidently true dictates of nature which are the common as well 
as the noblest heritage of the human race. Then, when the 
truth has little by little been hidden by error, a thing that often 
happens, manifold false and pernicious theories will prevail. In 
this state of things every advantage gained by license will be 
gained to the disadvantage of liberty ; for the more license is 
curbed, the greater and more secure will liberty be. 

39. In matters of opinion, which God has left to the discussion 

scue et communit-r a natura datam. Qiue vera, quoe honesta sunt, ea licere 
pruclenterque in civitate propagari jus est, ut ad quamplures pei tineant ; 
opinionum mendacia, quibus nulla menii capitalior pestis, item vitia quae 
animum moresque corrumpunt, sequum est auctoritate publica diligenter coe'r- 
ceri, ne serpere ad perniciem reipublicre queant. Peccata licentis ingenii, 
qua sane in oppressionem cadunt multitudinis im peri toe, rectum est auctori- 
tate legum non minus coerceri, quam illatas per vim imbecillioribus injurias. 
Eo magis quod civium pars longe maxima prcestigias cavere captionesque 
dialecticas, praesertim quce blandiantur cupiditatibus, aut non possunt omnino, 
aut sine summa difficultate non possunt. Permissa cuilibet loquendi scribendi- 
que infinita licentia, nihil est sanctum inviolatumque permansurum : ne illis 
quidem parcetur maximis verissimisque naturae judicii". quoa habenda sunt 
velut commune idemque nobilissimum human! generis patrimonium. Sic sen- 
sim obducta tenebris veritate, id quod ssepe contingit, facile dominabitur 
opinionum error perniciosus et multiplex. Qua ex re tantum capiet licentia 
commodi, quantum detrimenti libertas : eo enim est major futura libertas 
ac tutior, quo frena licentias majora. 


of men, each one is free, of course, to hold his own opinion, and to 
express it openly. Nature gives us this right. This liberty never 
works to the prejudice of truth, but often to its development and 

40. With regard to the Freedom of Education we must reason as 
on freedom of speech and of the press. There is no doubt that 
truth should alone imbue the mind. In it lies the good, the 
end, the perfection of intelligent beings. Hence, all instruction, 
whether given the ignorant that they may acquire knowledge, or 
the learned that they may retain the knowlege acquired, should be 
confined to truths. It is manifestly the duty of teachers to 
eradicate . error from the mind, and to strengthen the mind 
against the encroachment of error by sound reasoning. Hence 
liberty to teach any and everything would not only be altogeth- 
er against reason but would tend to pervert the mind completely. 
Without failing in their duty, the public authorities can grant no 
such liberty to any citizen ; especially because of the influence 
always exerted by teachers over their pupils, and again because 
only veiy rarely is the pupil capable of deciding for himself 
whether the assertions of the master are true or not. Tnerefore, 
liberty of teaching likewise, to be approvable, must be circum- 
scribed withi'n certain limits. Otherwise, the business of teaching 
could be turned into a means of corruption. 

XXXIX. At vero derebus opinabilibus disputation! hominum a Deo permissis, 
utique quod placeat sentire, quodque sentiatur, libere eloqui concessum est, 
non repugnante natura : tails euim libertas nunquam homines ad oppri- 
mendam veriiatcm, saepe ad indagandam ac patefaciendam deducit. 

XXXX. De ea, quam doctndi libertatem nominant, oportet non dissimili ra- 
tione judicare. Cum dubium esse non possit quin imbuere animos sola veritas 
debeat, quod in ipsa intelligentium naturarum bonum est et finis et per- 
fectio sita, propterea non debet doctrina nisi vera proecipere, idque turn iis 
qui nesciant, turn qui sciant, scilicet ut cognitionem veri alteris afferat, in 
alteris tueatur. Ob eamque caussam eorum, qui prsecipiunt, plane officium 
est eripere ex animis errorem, et ad opinionuin fallacias obsepire certis 
praesidiis viam. Igitur apparet, magnopere cum .ratione pugnare, ac natam 
esse pervertendis funditus mentibus illam, de qua institutus est sermo, 
libertatem, quatenus sibi vult quidlibet pro arbitratu docendi licentiam : 
quam quidem licentiam civitati dare publica potestas, salvo officio, non 
potest. Eo vel magis quod magistrorum apud auditores multum valet 
auctoritas, et verane sint, quse a doctore traduntur, raro admodum dijudi- 
care per se ipse discipulus potest. Quamobrem hanc quoque libertatem, ut 
honesta sit, certis finibus circumscriptatn teneri necesse est: nimirum ne 
fieri impune possit, ut ars docendi in instrumentum corrupted vertatur. 


41. Truth, which should alone be the object of teaching, is 
twofold, natural and supernatural. Natural truths, such as the first 
principles of morality and the proximate conclusions thence de- 
duced by reason, are the common heritage of mankind. On these 
truths, as on a solid basis, rest morality, justice, religion, and human 
society itself. Nothing would be more impious, more stupidly 
inhuman, than to permit that basis to be disturbed or overturned 
with impunity. 

42. Nor should those treasured truths, which we derived from 
revelation, be less jealously guarded. By many and luminous 
arguments, such as the Christian apologists were wont to use, 
certain fundamental points are established ; for instance, that 
God has divinely revealed certain truths ; that the only-be- 
gotten Son of God became man, in order to give testimony to 
the truth ; that he founded a perfect society, the Church, 
of which he himself remains the head ; and that he promised 
to be with his Church until the end of time. All the truths 
which he taught he entrusted to this society, whose duty it 
became to guard, defend, and authoritatively explain them. At 
the same time, he commanded all nations to yield obedience to 
his Church, even as to himself, under pain of damnation. Hence 
it is certain that the best and safest of all teachers for man is 
God himself, the fountain and principle of all truth ; and that 
the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, is 

XLI. Veri autem, in quo unice versari prsecipientium doctrina debet, 
unum est naturale genus, supernaturale alierum. Ex veritatibus naturalibus, 
cujusmodi sunt principia nature et ea quse ex illi^ proxime ratione ducun- 
tur, exisiit humani generis velut commune patrimonium : in quo, tamquam 
fundamento firmissimo cum mores et justitia et religio, atque ipsa conjunctio 
societatis humanse nitatur, nihil tarn impium esset tamque stolide inhumanum, 
quam illud violari ac diripi impune sinere. 

XLII. Nee minore conservandus religione maxiiims sanctissimusque the- 
saurus earum rerum, quas Deo auctore cognoscimus. Argumentis multis et 
illustribus, quod scepe apologetce consueverunt, pnecipua quoedam capita consti- 
tuuntur, cujusmodi ilia sunt; qucedam esse a Deo divmitus tradita : Unigeni- 
tum Dei Filium carnem factum, ut testimonium perhiberet veritati : perfectam 
quamdam ab eo conditam societatem, nempe Ecclesiam, cujus ipsemet caput 
est, et quncum usque ad consummationem sseculi ,se futurum esse promisir. 
Huic societati commendatas omnes, quas ille docuisset, veritates voluit, hac 
lege, ut eas ipsa custodiret. tueretur, legitirm cum auctoritate explicaret t 
unaque simul jussit, omnes gentes Ecclesire suse, perinde ac sibimetipsi, dicto 
audientes esse : qui secus facerent, interim perditum iri sempiterno. Qua 


the way, the truth, the life, the true light which enlighteneth 
every man. All men should be docile disciples of his, And 
they shall all be taught of God. 1 

43. Now, in the matter of faith and morals, God himself made 
the Church a partaker in his own divine authority, and in re- 
gard to these, rendered her by his divine favor incapable of 
erring. Hence the Church is the supreme and safest teacher 
of mankind, and possesses an inviolable right to teach. As 
a matter of fact, the Church, resting on the truths communicated 
to her by her divine founder, has thought nothing of more 
importance than to fulfil this mission of teaching ; and sur- 
rounded with obstacles on every side, she never ceased to 
struggle the harder for her liberty to teach. It was owing to 
these efforts that paganism was driven out, and the light of 
Christianity spread over the whole world. 

44. Reason itself teaches us that truths divinely revealed 
cannot be in contradiction with natural truths. When a pro- 
position, therefore, antagonizes a truth that is known to be 
revealed, we know that proposition is false. Hence this divine 
authority of the Church, far from being a hindrance to learning 

ratione plane constat, optimum homini esse certissimumque magistrum Deum, 
omnis fontem ac principium revitatis, item Unigenitum, qui est in sinu 
Patris, viam, veritatem, vitam, lucem veram, que illuminat omnem homi- 
nem, et ad cujus disciplinam dociles esse omnes homines oportet: Et crunt 
omnes docibiles Dei. l 

XLIII. Sed in fide atque in institutione morum, divini magisterii Ecclesiam 
fecit Deus ipse participem, eamdemque divino ejus beneficio falli nesciam; quare 
magistra mortalium est maxima ac tutissima, in eaque in est non violabile 
jus ad magisterii libertatem. Revera doctrinis divinitus acceptis se ipsa 
Ecclesia sustentons, nihil habnit antiquius, quam ut munus sibi demandatum 
a Deo sancte expleret ; eademque circumfusis undique dimcultatibus fortior, 
pro libertate magisterii sui propugnare nullo tempore destitit. Hac via orbis 
terrarum, miserrima superstitione depulsa, ad christianam sapientiam reno- 
vatus est. 

XLIV. Quoniam vero ratio ipsa perspicue docet, veritates divinitus traditas et 
veritates naturales inter se oppositas esse revera non posse, ita ut quod- 
cumque cum illis dissentiat, hoc ipso falsum esse necesse sit, idcirco 
divinum Ecclesite magisteriuin tantum abest ut studia discendi atque incre- 
menta scientiarum intercipiat, aut cultioris humanitatis progressionem ullo 
modo retardet, ut potius plurimum afferat luminis securamque tutelam. 
Eademque caussa non parum proficit ad ipsam libertatis humanoe perfectionem, 

1 John, vi. 45. 


and the advancement of the sciences, or retarding in any way the 
progress of civilization, rather throws light on all, and is a protec- 
tion to all. And this same teaching authority of the Church 
contributes not a little to the perfection of human liberty. For, 
in the language of Jesus Christ, our Saviour, a man is made 
free by the truth : And you shall knew the truth, and the truth 
shall make you free. 1 

45. There is no cause, therefore, for genuine liberty to fume, or 
true science to chafe at those ju-t and necessary laws which both 
the Church and reason claim should regulate teaching. Nay, 
though the Church in so acting aims chiefly at defending the 
Christian faith, yet it is seen, as a matter of fact, that in pursuing 
that line she at the same time endeavors to foster and advance 
every branch of human learning. For in itself human learning 
is good, laudable, desirable. Besides, all manner of erudition, which 
comes from sound reasoning, and is not contrary to the truth, 
contributes not a little to illustrate the truths of revelation. To 
the Church we owe the preservation of the ancient classics. 
To the Church we are indebted for the founding, here, there, 
and everywhere, of schools. To the loving zeal of the Church 
for learning, we owe as a matter of fact all that we now possess 

cum Jesu Christ! servatoris sit ilia sententia, fieri hominem veritate liberum. 
Cognoscetis veritalem, et veritas liberabit vos. ' 

XLV. Quare non est caussa, cur germana libertas indignetur, aut veri- nominis 
scientia moleste ferat leges justas ac debitas, quibus hominum doctrinam 
contineri Ecclesia simul et ratio consentienes postulant. Quin imo Ecclesia, 
quod re ipsa passim testatum est, hoc agens praecipue et maxime ut fidem 
christianam tueatur, humanarum quoque doctrinarum omne genus fovere et 
in majus provehere studet. Bona enim per se est et laudabilis atque ex- 
petenda elegantia doctrinae ; praetereaque omnis eruditio, quam sana ratio 
pepererit, quaeque rerum veritati respondeat, non mediocriter ad ea ipsa 
illustranda valet, quae Deo auctore credimus. Revera Ecclesiae haec beneficia 
debentur sane magna, quod proeclare monumenta sapientia veteris conser- 
varit ; quod scientiarum domicilia passim apperuerit ; quod ingeniorum 
cursum semper incitaverit, studiosissime has ipsas artes alendo; quibus 
maxime urbanitas astatis nostrae coloratur. Denique praetereundum non est, 
immensum patere campum, in quo hominum excurrere industria, seseque 
exrrcere ingenia libere queant : res scilicet quae cum doctrina fidei morum- 
que christianorum non habent necessariam cognationem, vel de quibus 
Ecclesia, nulla adhilita sua auctoritate, judicium eruditorum relinquit inte- 
grum ac liberum. 

1 John, viii. 32. 


of our vaunted civilization, Finally, it must be remembered that 
an immense field lies still open to man's industry, over all of 
which his intellect can freely roam, namely, over all those sub- 
jects that have no necessary connection with the doctrine of 
faith and Christian morals, or those in regard to which* the 
Church has not authoritatively spoken, leaving in their regard the 
opinions of the learned fiee and untrammeled. 

46. From the foregoing may be understood what is the liberty, 
and the kind of liberty, of teaching which the followers of Liberalism 
desire and extol with equal ardor. On the one hand, they claim 
for themselves and the State such gross license in the matter, that 
they do not hesitate to admit, and open the way for, the teaching 
of the most monstrous opinions; while, on the other, they impede 
the action of the Church in various ways and restrict her liberty 
within the narrowest bounds, although from her action no evil 
need be feared, but rather great advantages may be expected. 

47. Not less vaunted is what they call Liberty of Conscience. 
This liberty, if it be understood in the sense that each individual 
is free to worship God or not as he chooses, any pretence to 
such liberty is sufficiently refuted by the arguments already ad- 
duced. But the expression may also have this meaning, that man 
in civil society should have the right to comply with all his duties 

XLVI. His ex rebus intelligitur, quse et qualis ilia sit in hoc genere libertas, 
quam pari studio volunt et predicant Liberalismi sectatores. Ex una parte 
sibi quidem ac reipublicre licentiam adserunt tantam, ut cuilibet opinio- 
num perversitati non dubitent aclitum januamque patefacere ; ex aliera 
Ecclesiam plurifariam impediunt, ejusque libertatem in fines quantum possunt 
maxima angustos compellunt, quamquam ex Ecclesije doctrina non modo 
nullum incommodum pertimescendum sit, sed magnse omnino u'.ilitates 

XLVII. Ilia quoque magnopere prredicatur, quam Conscientia; Libertatem nomi- 
nant : quae si ita accipiatur, ut suo cuique arbitratu seque liceat Deum 
colere, non colere, argumentis qute supra allata sunt, satis convincitur. Sed 
potest etiam in hanc sententiam accipi, ut homini ex con=cientia officii, Dei 
voluntatem sequi et jussa facere, nulla re impediente, in civitate liceat. 
Hsec quidem vera, h?ec digna filiis Dei libertas, quse humanse dignitatem 
personse honestissime tuetur, est omni vi injuriaque major : eaclemque 
Ecclesise semper optata ac prcecipue cara. Hajus generis libertatem sibi 
constanter vindicavere Apostoli, sanxere scriplis apologetse, martyres ingenti 
numero sanguine suo consecravere. Et merito quidem : propterea quod 
maximam justissimamque Dei in homines potestatem, vicissimque hominum 
adversus Dsum princeps maximumque officium, libertas hsec chris'.iana testa- 


to God without any interference. This true liberty, worthy of the 
children of God, is superior to all violence or outrage. It has 
always been advocated by the Church, and fondly fostered. This 
species of liberty the Apostles firmly claimed for therrselves ; it 
was 'contended for by the Christian apologists ; it was hallowed 
by the blood of an immense number of martyrs. And deservedly 
so : because this Christian liberty bespeaks, on the one hand, 
God's supreme and very natural dominion over man. and on 
the other, man's highest and principal duty towards God. It 
has nothing in common with the spirit of sedition and revolt, 
nor does it, in the remotest manner, suggest disobedience to 
the constituted civil authorities ; for these authorities have the 
right to command and to enforce their command?, so long as 
these do not conflict with the authority of God, and are 
confined within the order of things divinely established. But 
when rules command anything plainly contrary to the divine 
will, they depart from that order, and they are in conflict with 
the divine authority : in such case it is proper to disobey. 

48. On the contrary, the advocates of Liberalism, in claiming 
for the State all and absolute authority, and that life should be 
regulated without the slightest regard to God, logically deny 
this individual liberty of which we speak, a liberty based on 
individual virtue and religion ; and they as logically decry any 
act looking to the maintenance of this liberty of the individual, 
as criminal and contrary to public order. If the theory were 
true, there is no tyranny, however savage, which we ought not 
to submit to and bear. 

tur. Nihil habet ipsa cum animo seditioso nee obediente commune : neque 
ullo pacto putanda est, velle ab obsequio publics potestatis desciscere, 
propterea quod imperare atque imperata exigere, eatenus potestati humanse 
jus est, quatenus cum potestate Dei nihil dissentiat, consiitutoque divinitus 
rnodo se contineat. At vero cum quidquam prrecipitur quod cum divina 
voluntate aperte discrepct, turn longe ab illo modo disceditur, simulque 
cum auctoritate divina confligitur : ergo rectum est non parere. 

XLVIII. Contra. Liberalismi fautores, qui herilem ntque infinite potentem 
faciunt principatum, vitamque nullo ad Deum respectu degendam predicant, 
hanc de qua loquimur conjunctam cum honestate religioneque libertatem 
minime agnoscunt : cujus conservandae caussa, si quid fiat, injuria et contra 
rempublicam factum criminantur. Quod si vere dicerem, nulius esset tarn 
immanis dominatus, cui subesse et quern ferre non oporteret. 

{Continued, next page.] 

"Opto magts senlire compunctionem quam scire ejus definition em. " a Kempis 


AUGUST, 1888. 

No. 10. 

49. Most earnestly would the Church desire to see those 
Christian principles, on which we have briefly touched, penetrate 
in theory and in practice the whole social order. For in them 
lies the supreme remedy for the evils of these times, evils 
which are certainly neither few nor slight, and which, in great 
part, come of those very liberties which men so highly boast 
of, and to which they looked for salvation and glory. But 
their expectations have been disappointed in the result. Instead 
of the pleasant and wholesome fruits expected, there come only 
fruits bitter and contaminated. If now a remedy be sought, 
let it be sought in the re-establishment of sound principles, by 
which alone the maintenance of order and, consequently, a 
guarantee for the maintenance of true liberty, can be reasonably 

50. Yet the Church, with a mothers judgment, does not fail 
to take into account the pressure of human frailty ; nor is she 
ignorant of the tendency of minds and events, with which our 
age is borne along. For this reason, while accepting nothing as 
right, but what is true and virtuous, she tolerates in the civil 

XLIX. Vehementer quidem vellet Ecclesia, in onmes reipublicse orciines hsec, 
quse summatim attigimus, Christiana documenta re usuque penetrarent. In iis 
enim summa efficacitas inest ad sananda horum temporum mala, non sane 
pauca nee levia, eique magnam partem iis ipsis nata libertatibus, quse tanta 
prsedicatione efferuntur, et in quibus salutis gloriseque inclusa semina vide- 
bantur. Spem fefellit exitus. Pro jucundis et salubribus acerbi et inquinati 
provenere fructus. Si remedium quoeritur, sanarum doctrinarum revocatione 
quteratur, a quibus solis conservat : o ordinis, adeoque verse tutela libertatis 
fidenter expectari potest. 

L. Nihilominus materno judicio Ecclesia sestimat grave pondus innrmitatis 
humanse : et qualis hie sit, quo nostra vehitur setas, animorum rerumque 
cursus, non ignorat. His de caussis, nihil quidem impertiens juris nisi iis 
quse vera quseque honesta sint, non recusat quominus quidpiam a veritate 
justitiaque alienum ferat tamen publica potestas, scilicet majus aliquod vel 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 

2 9 o THE PASTOR. 

authority the doing of things that deflect from the true and 
virtuous, but only to avoid a greater evil or to obtain or pre- 
serve a greater good. God himself, though infinitely good and 
powerful, permits, in his providence, evil to exist in the world, 
partly not to prevent a greater good, and partly that greater evils 
may not follow. In the government of civil society, it is proper 
to imitate the Ruler of the universe. Nay, since human authority 
cannot reach every trespass, it must necessarily tolerate and leave un- 
punished m:ny things which are punished by divine providence, and 
rightly punishtd. St. Augustine. 

51. Still, if under such circumstances the civil authorities may 
tolerate for the public good, and for this cause only, the commission 
of evil, they cannot and ought not to approve or desire its com- 
mission. For evil, being in itself a privation of good, is necessarily 
-opposed to the public good, which the civil authorities, as far 
as they can, are bound to procure and safeguard. And in this 
matter, along with others, the civil authorities should strive to 
imitate the example of God, who, while he permits evil to exist 
in the world, neither desires evil to be done, nor desires evil to be not 
.done, but wishes the doing of evil to be permitted: and this is good. 

St. Thomas. This brief sentence of the Angelic Doctor contains 
the whole doctrine of the Church regarding the permission of evil. 

52. But if the truth be spoken all will admit that the more 
the commission of evil must .be tolerated by the authorities, the 

vitandi caus>a malum, vel adipiscendi aut conservandi bonum. Ipse pro- 
videntissimus Deus cum infinitre sit bonitatis, idemque omnia possit, sinit 
tamen esse in mundo mala, partim ne ampliora impediantur bona, partim 
ne mnjora mala consequantur. In regendis civitatibus rectorem mundi par 
est imitari.: quin etiam cum singula mala prohibere auctoritas hominum non 
possit, debet mitlla concedere aique impunita relinquere, qitz per divinam 
tauten providentlam vindicantur, et recte. l 

LI. Verumtamen in ejusmodi rerum adjunctis, si communis boni caussa, 
et line tantum caussa, potest, vel etiam debet, lex hominum ferre' toleranter 
malum, tamen nee potest nee debet id probare aut velle per se : quia malum 
per se cum sit boni privatio, repugnat bono communi, quod legislator, quoad 
optime potest, velle ac tueri debet. Et hac quoque in re ad imitandum 
sibi lex humana proponat Deum necesse est, qui in eo quod mala esse 
in mund-> sinit, neque vult mala fieri, neque vult mala non fieri, sed vult 
fcrmittere mala fieri, el hoc est bonum. 2 Quce doc'oris Angelici sententia 
brevissime totam continet de malorum tolerantia doctrinam. 

LIT. Sed c >nfitend m est, si vere judicari velit, quanto plus in civitate mali 

1 S. Aiigu^'. De Lib. Arb., lib. I., cap. 6., num. 14. 
3 S. "11.. p. i, qu. xix a. q. ad 3. 


farther is that State from being of the best ; and likewise, as the 
permission of evil can be tolerated only as an act of political 
prudence performed for the public good, so this tolerance must 
be limited to the circumstances wherein it is demanded by the 
public good. Wherefore it follows that, if the tolerance be injurious 
to the general welfare and only beget greater evils, it becomes 
unlawful. In these circumstances the reason why tolerance of evil 
is ever good, is wanting. And if it be customary for the Church, 
in the extraordinary circumstances of this age, to tolerate certain 
modern liberties, she does so, not because she approves of them 
in themselves, but because she judges it more expedient to per- 
mit them. Were the times better, she would assuredly use her 
liberty, and by persuading, exhorting, imploring, she would strive, 
as is her duty, to fulfil the mission given her by the Almighty, 
namely to work for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, 
however, is always true, namely, that liberty, for all to do all things, 
is not a thing in itself desirable, This we have repeatedly 
affirmed. Were such liberty good, error would enjoy the same 
rights as truth, a thing repugnant to reason. 

53. In regard to Tolerance it is astonishing how far from 
comprehending the moderation and prudence of the Church those 
are who advocate Liberalism. For, in claiming for all citizens 
unrestrained license in every direction, as we remarked, they 
pass all bounds, and end by seemingly making no difference 
between virtue and vice, truth and falsehood. And because the 
Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the infallible teacher 

tolerari pernecesse est, tanto magis distare id genus civitatis ab optimo ; 
itemque tolerautiam rerum malarum, cum pertineat ad politicce prsecepta pru- 
dentias, omnino circumscribi iis finibus oportere, quos caussa, id est salus pub- 
lica, postulat. Quare, si saluti publicae detrimentum afferat et mala civitati 
majora pariat, consequens est earn adhiberi non licere, quia in his rerum 
adjunctis abest ratio boni. Si vero ob singularia reipublicoe tempora usuve- 
niat, ut modernis quibusdam libertatibus Ecclesia acquiescat, mn quod ipsas 
per se malit, sed quia permissas esse judicat expedire, versis in meliora tem- 
poribus, adhibitura sane esset libertatem suam, et suadendo, hortando, obse- 
crando studeret, uti debet, munus efficere sibi assignatum a Deo, videlicet 
sempiternae hominum saluti consulere. Illud tamen perpetuo verum est, istam 
omnium et ad omnia libertatem non ese, quemadmodum pluries diximus, 
expetendam per se, quia falsum eodem jure esse ac verum, rationi repugnat. 
LIII. Et quod ad Tolerantiam pertinet, mirum quantum ab Eequitate pru- 
dentiaque Ecclesiae distant, qui Liberalismum profitentur. Etenim permittenda 
civibus omnium earum rerum, quas diximus, infinita licentia, omnino modum 
transiliunt, atque illuc evadunt, ut nihilo plus honestati veritatique tribuere, quam 

2 9 2 THE PASTOR. 

of morals, firmly reprobated, as she ought, this debauching and 
demoralizing species of tolerance, and denounced it as immoral, they 
will, forsooth, decry her as being intolerant and unforbearing. 
In doing so they do not perceive that they set down as a crime 
what is praiseworthy. But notwithstanding all this boasting about 
tolerance, it is not unfrequently seen that these men are very 
narrow-minded and bigoted when there is question of liberty for 
the Catholic religion ; and that, while pretending to grant the 
largest liberties to all, they commonly refuse to' allow freedom 
to the Catholic Church. 

54. Briefly to recapitulate, for clearness' sake, all that we have 
here written, and indicate the conclusions thence following, we add 
a summary as follows : Man is, of necessity, wholly subject to 
the real and perpetual dominion of God, and consequently human 
liberty, as independent of God and of his divine will, is a thing 
that cannot possibly be conceived. And to deny this dominion 
of God, or be "unwilling to subject himself to it, is, on the 
part of man, not an act of liberty, but an abuse of liberty 
amounting to rebellion : and from such a disposition of the 
mind is evolved, and 'in it lies, the chief vice of Liberalism. 
There are many forms of Liberalism ; for not in one way only, 
nor always in the same degree can the will refuse the obedience 
due to God, or to those whom God has constituted partakers 
in his divine power. 

55. It is surely the greatest abuse of liberty, and the worst 

falsitati, ac turpitudini videatur. Ecclesiam vero, columnam et finnamentum 
veritatis, eamdemque incorruptam morum magistram, quia tarn dissolutum fla- 
gitiosumque Tolerantiiz genus constanter, ut debet, repudiat, idemque adhiberi 
fas esse negat, criminantur esse a patientia et lenitate alienam ; quod cum 
faciunt, minime sentiunt, se quidem, quod laudis est, in vitio ponere. Sed in 
tanta ostentatione Tolerantice re persaepe contingit, ut restricti ac tenaces in 
rem catholicam sint ; et qui vulgo libertatem effuse largiuntur, iidem liberam 
sinere Ecclesiam passim recusant. 

LIV. Et ut omnis oratio una cum consectariis suis capitulatim breviter- 
que, perspicuitatis gratia, colligatur, summa est, necessitate fieri, ut totus 
homo in verissima perpetuaque potestate Dei sit : proinde libertatem hominis, 
nisi obnoxiam Deo ejusque voluntati subjectam, intelligi minime posse. 
Quern quidem in Deo principatum aut esse negare, aut ferre nolle, non 
liberi hominis est, sed abutentis ad perduellionem libertate : proprieque ex 
animi tali affectione conflatur et efficitur Liberalismi capitale vitium. Cujus 
tamen distinguitur forma multiplex : potest enim voluntas non uno modo, 
neque uno gradu ex obtemperatione discedere, quae vel Deo, vel iis, qui 
potestatem divinam participant, debetur. 


kind of Liberalism to reject entirely the dominion of God and 
to refuse him all obedience, whether in the social order or in 
private and domestic affairs. Of such Liberalism should be 
understood all that we have here written. 

56. The next theory is that of those who admit that we 
should be subject to God, the creator and ruler of the world, 
since by his power all things were made. But they boldly 
reject the laws of faith and morals as not founded on nature, 
even though promulgated by God himself; or, at least, say they, 
no heed need be paid to any such laws, especially by the State. 
How wrong, how inconsistent these theorists are, we have seen 
above. From their theory, too, as from its head and princi- 
ple, flows the pernicious doctrine of the day in regard to 
the separation of Church and State ; whereas from right reasoning 
the contrary follows, namely, that the two powers, though called 
to the performance of different functions and not placed on the 
same plane, should be co-ordinate by the harmony of their 
actions and the interchange of good offices. 

57. The separation of Church and State is understood in 
two ways : Many favor a complete and total separation, so that 
in all that concerns the social order, institutions, customs, laws, 
public office, the education of youth, the Church should be no 
more regarded than if she did not exist at all. At most, they 
would allow individual citizens to practise their religion in private, 

LV. Profecto impeiium summi Dei funditus recusare atque omnem 
obedientiam prorsus exuere in publicis, vel etiam in privatis domesticisque 
rebus, sicut maxima libertatis perversitas, ita pessimum Liberalisiui est genus : 
omninoque de hoc intelligi debent quce hactenus contra diximus. 

LVI. Proxima est eorum disciplina, qui utique consentiunt, subesse mundi 
opifici ac principi Deo oportere, quippe cujus ex numine tola est apta 
natura ; sed iidem leges fidei et rnorum, quas natura non capiat, ipsa Dei 
auctoritate traditas, audacter repudiant, vel saltern nihil esse ajunt, cur 
earum habeatur, praesertim publice in civitate, ratio. Qui pariter quanto in 
errore versentur, et quam sibimetipsis parum cohsereant, supra vidimus. Et 
ab hac doctrina, tamquam a capite principioque suo, ilia manat perniciosa 
sententia de rationibus Ecclesice a republica disparandis : cum contra liqueat, 
geminas potestates, in munere dissimili et gradu dispari, opportere tamen 
esse inter se actionum concordia et mutatione officiorum consentientes. 

LVI I. Huic tamquam generi subjecta est opinio duplex. Plures enim rem. 
publicam volunt ab Ecclesia sejunctam et penitus et totam, ita ut in omni 
jure societatis humanse, in institutis, moribus, legibus, reipublicre muneribus, 
institutione juventutis, non magis ad Ecclesiam respiciendum censeant, quam 
si esset omnino nulla : permissa ad summum singulis civibus facultate, ut 


if they were so inclined. Against these, those arguments by 
which we already refuted the doctrine of the separation of 
Church and State may be still pleaded in their full force, adding 
only one more, to wit, that it is absurd to expect that the 
citizen can reverence the Church as an individual, and despise 
it as a member of the body politic. 

58. Others do not refuse to recognize the existence of the 
Church indeed how could they? But they deny her the 
nature and rights of a perfect society : they insist that it lies 
not within her province to make laws, pass judgments, punish, 
but merely to exhort, persuade, and govern those who, of their 
own accord, voluntarily submit to her rule. Swayed by this 
conception, they misconceive the very nature of this society, 
they icstrict and limit its authority, its right to teach, all its 
efficiency ; while, at the same time, they so exaggerate the pre- 
rogatives of the State as regards the Church, as to make her 
like any voluntary association of citizens, subject to the power 
and jurisdiction of the State. To refute this theory, the arguments 
ordinarily used by Christian controversialists will suffice. And 
these arguments were touched upon by ourselves, especially in 
the Encyclical Immortah Dei. These prove that, by divine 
institution, there exists in the Church eveiything that pertains to 
the nature and rights af a society, lawful, self-governing, and 
perfect in all its parts. 

59. Finally, there are many who think that there should be 

privatim, si libeat, dent religion! operam. Contra quos plane vis argumen- 
torum omnium valet, quibus ipsam de distraliendis Kcclcsitc reique civilis 
rationibus sententiam convincimus : hoc prteterea acljuncto, quod est perab- 
surdum, ut Eccltsiam civis vereatur, civitas contemnat. 

LVIII. Alii, quominus Ecclesia sit. non repugnant, neque enim possent : 
ei tamen naturam juraque propria societatis perfectse eripiunt, nee ejus e.-se, 
contendunt, facere leges, judicare, ulcisci, sed cohortari dumtaxar, suaclere, 
regere sua sponte et voluntate subjectos. Itaque divinoe liujusce societatis 
naturam opinione adulterant, auctoritatem, magisterium, omnem ejus effici- 
entiam extenurmt et coangustant, vim simul potestatemque civilis principatus 
usque eo exaggerantes, ut sicut unam quamvis e consociaiionibus civium 
voluntariis, ita Ecclesiam Dei sub imperium ditinnemque reipublicce subjun- 
gant. Ad hos plane .refellendos argumenta valent Apologetis usitata, nee 
praetermissa Nobis, nomina'.iin in epistola encyclica Immortelle Dti, ex 
quibus efficitur, divinitus esse constitutum, ut omnia in Ecclesia insint, 
quse ad naturam ac jura pertineant legitimse, summre, et omnibus partibus 
perfectse societatis. 

LIX. Multi denique rei sacrae a re civili distraction em non probant; sed 


no separation of Church and State. But they think that 
the Church should yield to the spirit of the age, and conform 
her actions and accommodate her teachings to the lines which 
prudence bids modern governments follow. And this opinion is 
sound if understood only of a reasonable yielding, not incon- 
sistent with truth and justice ; as, for instance, if there be a 
well founded hope of obtaining a great good by pursuing a 
certain policy, the Church should be lenient and yield to the 
spirit of the age all she can, consistently with the holiness of 
her mission. But she cannot yield in regard to those things 
and theories unrighteous, which the degeneration of morals and 
false philosophy have introduced. There can be no giving way 
when religion, truth, and justice are in question ; and as God 
has -placed these things, the highest and the holiest, in the care 
of the Church, there is nothing more outrageous than to wish 
that she should set her seal on error as truth, wrong as right, 
or connive at things baneful to religion. 

60. From the foregoing it follows that it is never lawful to 
claim, to defend, to grant, unrestricted liberty of worship or of think- 
ing, writing, teaching, as a right which nature gave to man. For, 
if such liberty were man's natural right, there would exist a right 
as against God's supreme dominion, nor could human liberty 
be regulated by any law. From what we have said it like- 
wise follows that freedom in these things, if there be 
sufficient cause, may be tolerated, but only when used with 
moderation, and not suffered to degenerate into mere wilfulness 

tamen faciendum censent, ut Ecclesia obsequatur tempori, et flectat se atque 
accommodet ad ea, quoe in administrandis imperils hodierna prudenlia desi- 
derat. Quorum est honesta sententia, si de quadam intelligatur seqaa 
ratione, qure consistere cum veritate justitiaque possit : nimirum ut, explorata 
spe magni alicujus boni, indulgentem EAlesia sese impertiat, idque tempo- 
ribus largiattir quod salva officii sanctitate potest. Verum secus est de 
rebus ac doctrinis, quas demutatio morum ac fallax judicium contra fas 
invexerint. Nullum tempus vacare religione, veritate, justitia potest : quas 
res maximas et sanctissimas cum Deus in tutela Ecclesije esse jusserit, 
nihil est tarn alienum quam velle, ut ipsa quod vel falsum est vel injus- 
tum dissimulanter ferat, aut in iis quas sunt religion! noxia conniveat. 

LX. Itaque ex dictis consequitur, nequaquam licere petere, defendere, 
largiri, cogitandi, scribendi, docendi. itemque promiscuam religionum liber- 
tatem, veluti jura totidem, quse homini natura dederit. Nam si vere natura 
dedisset, imperium Dei detrectari jus esset, nee ulla temperari lege libertas 
humana posset. Similiter consequitur, ista genera libertatis posse qnidem, 
si justos caussse sint, tolerari, definita tamen moderatione, ne in libidinem 


and insolence. Where, however, custom has sanctioned the 
existence of freedom in regard to all or any of them, citizens 
should avail themselves of this freedom from interference to 
lead Christian lives all the better. (At the same time, their 
opinions in regard to such freedom, considered in itself, should 
remain in accord with those of the Church.) For in so far as 
any species of liberty affords greater facilities for doing good, 
the liberty is to be esteemed good : but no further. 

6 1. Where government is actually oppressive, or there is 
reason to fear the advent of such a government as will make 
an unjust use of power to tyrannize, or to deprive the Church of 
her due liberties, it is lawful to strive to bring about such a 
change in political affairs as will secure freedom of action. 
This is not a seeking of unrestrained and crazy liberty but of 
a measure of relief for the public good. It is merely claiming 
that, where full licence is given to evil, there, the right to lead 
a Christian life shall not be interfered with. 

62. Neither is it wrong to prefer a popular form of government 
for its own sake, provided the Catholic doctrine regarding the 
origin and proper use of power be retained. Of the various 
forms of government, provided they be naturally adapted to the 
welfare of the citizens, trie Church rejects none. She wishes, 
however, as nature itself dictates, that they be each established 

atque insolentiam degenerent. Ubi vero harum libertatum viget consuetude, 
eas ad facultatem recte faciendi cives transferant, quodque sentit de illis 
Ecclesia, idem ipsi sentiant. Omnis enim libertas legitima putanda, quatenus 
rerum honestarum majorem facultatem afierat; praetcrea nunquam. 

LXI. Ubi dominatus premat aut impendeat ejusmodi, qui oppressam injusta 
vi teneat civitatem, vel carere Ecclesiam cogat libertate debita, fas est aliam 
quserere temperationem reipublicre, in qua agere cum libertate concessum 
sit: tune enim non ilia expetitur iijimodica et vitiosa libertas, sed sublevatio 
aliqua, salutis omnium caussa, quseritur, et hoc unice agitur ut, ubi rerum 
malarum licentia tribuitur, ibi potestas honeste faciendi ne impediatur. 

LXII. Atque etiam malle reipublicae statum populari temperatum genere 
non est per se contra officium, salva tamen doctrina catholica de ortu atque 
administratione publioe potestatis. Ex variis reipublicie generibus, modo 
sint ad consulendum utilitati civium per se idonea, nullum quidem Ecclesia 
respuit : singula tamen vult, quoad plane idem natura jubet, sine injuria 
cujusquam, maximeque integris Ecclesise juribus, esse constituta. 

LXIII. Ad res publicas gerendas accedere, nisi alicubi ob singularem rerum 
temporumque conditionem aliter caveatur, honestum est: immo vero probat 
Erclesia, singulos opernm suam in communem afierre fructum, et quantum 
quisque industria potest, tueri, conservare, augere rempublicam. 


without violating any one's rights, and especially the rights of the 

63. It is quite proper to take part in political affairs, unless 
here or there it be otherwise ruled, owing to exceptional circum- 
stances of time or place. Nay. the Church desires every cne 
to do what in him lies for the general welfare, and, as far as 
he can, defend, sustain, and contribute to the prosperity of his 

64. The aspirations of a people to be free from foreign domina- 
tion or from the rule of a despot, the Church does not condemn, 
provided these aspirations can be realized without violating justice. 
Neither does she reprove efforts made to give each country the 
right to make its own laws and to its citizens every means of 
bettering their condition. The Church has always most devotedly 
fostered civil liberty where it did not run to excess: of this the 
best witnesses are those Italian cities which rose to prosperity, 
wealth, glory, at the time when the salutary influence of the 
Church was exerted, without opposition, on every portion of the 
social fabric. 

65. Guided by faith as well as reason, we have delivered these 
things to you, Venerable Brethren. We trust, with your help 
especially, that they will be of service to many. For ourselves, 
in humbleness of heart we lift our eyes to God and earnestly 
implore Him mercifully to grant of his wisdom and his counsel 
light to men, that, enlightened by these graces, they may be 
able to discern the truth in matters of such moment, and as a 
consequence, both in public and in private life, live up to the 

LXIV. Neque illud Ecclesia damnat, velle gentetn suam nemini servire, nee 
externo, nee domino, si modo fieri, incolumi justitia, queat. Denique 
nee eos reprehendit qui efficere volunt, ut civitates suis legibus vivant, 
civesque quam maxima augendorum commodorum facultate donentur. Civi- 
carum sine 'intemperantia libertatum semper esse Ecclesia fautrix fidelissima 
consuevit : quod testantur potissimum civitates Italicae, scilicet prosperitatem, 
opes, gloriam nominis municipal! jure adepUe, quo tempore salutaris Ecclesiae 
virtus in omnes reipublicae paries, nemine repugnante, pervaserat. 

LXV. Hzec quidem, Venerahiles Fratres, quae fide simul et ratione duce, pro 
officio Nostro Apostolico trarlidimus, fructuosa pluriinis futura, vobis maxima 
Nobiscum adnitentibus, confidimus. Nos quidem in humilitate cordis Nostri 
supplices ad Deum oculos tollimus, vehementerque petimus, ut sapientiae 
consiliique sui lumen largiri hominibus benigne velit, scilicet ut his aucti 
virtutibus possint in rebus tanti moment! vere cernere, et quod consequens 
est, conyenientur veritati, privatim, publice, omnibus temporibus immotaque 


truth with a constancy unchanged by any change of circum- 
stances. As a pledge of these heavenly gifts and in witness 
of our good-will, Venerable Brethren, we most lovingly in the 
Lord impart to you and to the clergy and people over whom 
you preside the Apostolic benediction. 

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, on the 2Oth day of June, 
1888, the eleventh year of our Pontificate, 

Pope Leo XIII. 

constantia vivere. Horum coelestium munerum auspicem -et Nostrae benevo- 
lentite testem vobis, Venerabiles Fratres, et clero populoque, cui singuli 
prseestis, Apostolicam benedictionem peramanter in Domino impertimus. 

Datum Romse apud S. Petrum die xx. Junii An. Mocccucxxviii., Pon- 
tificatus Nostri Undecimo. 



May a freemason be admitted as godfather ? No. And 
if the priest have any reasonable suspicion that the man 
who presents himself to stand for the child is a member of 
the excommunicated sect, it is his duty to enquire and satisfy 
himself of the fact before proceeding to baptize. " Parochus, 
antequam ad baptizandum accedat, ab iis, ad quos spectat, 
exquirat diligenter, quem, vel quos susceptores seu patrinos 
elegerint, qui infantem de sacro fonte suscipiant, ne plures quam 
licet, aut indignos, aut ineptos admittat. Patrinos saltern in 
setate pubertatis ac Sacramento confirmationis obsignatos esse, 
maxime convenit. Sciant praeterea parochi ad hoc munus non 
esse admittendos infideles, aut hasreticos, aut publice excommunicates, 
etc." By the constitution Apostolicce scdis (Vol. II., p. 129) free- 
masons and their abettors are laid under excommunication re- 
served (simpliciter) to the Roman Pontiff (Ch. ii., 4). 

Though the Church law on the matter is very positive and 
very clearly laid down, it must be remembered that such laws 
do not bind under all circumstances. The Church does not 
desire such laws to be enforced when the enforcement would 
tend to the detriment rather than the good of religion. Conse- 
quently it must be left to the good sense and prudence of the 
priest to decide whether it would be advisable or not, in a given 
case, to reject a known freemason from the office of godfather. 


[Taking Fr. Hecker's work, THE CHURCH AND THE AGE, for 
a text, it was the intention to indite a series of articles on 
Liberty. The following, written immediately after the appearance 
of the book, has been in type ever since, kept back from 
month to month for want of space. The publication of the 
encyclical Libertas would make any further discussion of the 
subject, on our part, impertinent. Without altering a word, we 
let the unfinished article go in as it was set up. Ed.] 

THE CHURCH AND THE AGE. (Supra p. 153.) 

Christ established his Church without even notifying the exist- 
ing secular powers. But these powers he left in the possession 
of all their legitimate authority. Previous to Christianity, the 
supreme authority, in matters religious ' as well as civil, was 
invested in the same hands. The all-sufficient cause was that 
only one supreme authority existed, the temporal. God had 
called into existence no sovereign authority in spirituals. But 
in the fulness of time that kingdom foretold by the prophets, a 
kingdom of which there should be no end, was founded. 
"And Jesus spoke to them saying : All power is given to me 
in heaven and in earth : Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost : teaching them to observe all things 
whatsoever I have commanded you : and behold I am with you 
all days, even to the consummation of the world/' Matt, xxviii. 

These words brought a new power into the world, sovereign 
and independent. The Apostles' duty was to TEACH the nations 
to OBSERVE, not what their rulers may decree, because decreed, 
all of them, orally ; some, both by word and writing. " What 
I have commanded you," is expressed in theological phrase as 

1 Suarez says : " Statuendum est, esse in humana republics potestatem 
ad instituenda sacrificia, qua? in nomine totius populi Deo offerantur, quoe 
nen possunt alicujus privata auctoritate institui aut immutari. Hiiec 

conclusio est certa, et communi omnium usu satis probata 

Hujus autem rei ratio primo ex eo reddi potest, quod natura hominum 
postulat, ut in politicum corpus reipublicre congi egetur ; hoc autem politi- 
cum corpus ad Dei cultum debet potissimum ordinari ; ergo necesse est, 
ut non solum singuli private colant Deum, sed etiam ut tota respublica 
per modum unius corporis cultum Deo exhibiat. De Eucharistia et Sacri- 
ficis Missce, Disp. 73, Sect. 4 n. 3. 


DEPOSITUM FIDEI. Christ taught his Apostles not only the 
things to be believed, but the things to be done, to be avoided; 
so, the DEPOSITUM FIDEI includes all things that come under 
the notions of faith and morals. And these "all things what- 
soever I have commmanded," the Apostles are bidden to go on 
teaching to all nations, even to nations then unborn, to the 
end of time : " I am with you till the consummation of the 
world/' The Apostles, then, either in person or through their 
lawful successors, have been teaching these "all things" every day 
and hour from the date of the Ascension to the present moment, 
and will so continue to the end of time. "All things" Christ 
commanded are taught ; nothing not commanded is taught : 
" Behold I am with you all days.'" Hence the infallibility of 
the Ecclesia docens, the bishops of the Church in the 
aggregate, resulting in the infallibility of the Pope, their head, 
who alone is empowered to speak for them. Were there no 
Pope for a period, or no known Pope, infallibility would not 
on that account cease to be. But in that case no individual 
bishop could authoritatively voice the faith of the Ecclesia 

The very elementary notion of infallibility implies magistracy 
or the right to command. To speak with assured certainty is 
to speak with authority. 

From the very first the Church appears in history as a 
kingdom. In the Apostles' own time, the hierarchy of jurisdic- 
tion existed, and has ever continued to exist. The conclusion 
is inevitable, that the establishment of this hierarchy was among 
the " things commanded " by Christ. We behold the supreme 
ruler, and under him magistrates, the patriarchs, archbishops, 
and bishops, governing and legislating for the various provinces 
and divisions of provinces. This jurisdiction, though necessarily 
flowing from the prerogative of infallibility, is not to be con- 
founded with infallibility. It exists in its own independent 
entity and reality. It is as much a divine creation as infallibility. 
Christ himself is the author of both. Each is essentially neces 
sary to the living Church, and only because necessary were 
they conferred. The Church has as divine a right to demand obe- 
dience to the laws made for the preservation of religion, as she 
has to require the assent of faith to any defined dogma. 

In the exercise of the two prerogatives, however, infallibility and 
jurisdiction, there is a difference, arising from their own very 


nature. A truth is always a truth. No adventitious circumstance 
can make a truth once defined cease to be a truth. It remains 
unchanged, unchangeable. Consequently, when the fiat of the 
infallibility prerogative has been pronounced, the end is reached. 
That this is not so with the prerogative of jurisdiction, is 
plain. The laws that may be necessary in one century or one 
country for the preservation or advancement of religion, may be 
injurious to religion in another. In such c.ise, the law is re- 
pealed expressly, or, what is oftener the case, allowed to pass 
into oblivion, or never enforced where it would be only injur- 
ious. From this it will be readily understood why laws merely 
disciplinary, whether made or promulgated by the Holy See', 
by ecumenical, plenary, or provincial councils, do not bind for 
all time, or bind at once every one or everywhere. It is not 
because such a law is in se devoid of any requisite to make 
it binding ; but because the lawgiver is presumed to have 
sense, and not wish his law to go into effect or be enforced 
by the local authorities in places where the operation of the 
law, or the action of the authorities, could only result in the 
injury, not the good of religion. 

From the authority itself of the legislator, then, his expressed 
or reasonably presumed will is derived the non-binding force of 
general disciplinary legislation in particular places. Various 
beyond enumeration may be the causes that would move the 
legislator so to will. Here, they may be spiritual purely, there, 
mixed or merely temporal. The Church nowhere pulls down, 
everywhere builds up. For that " immortal work of our 
merciful God, which is the Church, although in its essence and 
nature intended for procuring the salvation of souls and their 
happiness in heaven, yet begets so many and such great bless- 
ings, even in the temporal order, as to make it seem that, if 
instituted primarily and solely for the purpose of procuring 
man's prosperity here below, it could not do it more effectually." * 
In the Constitution from which we quote, the Pontiff shows 
that, while the Church is by her own divine right independent 
of all civil governments, her action the world over can be only 
beneficial to civil rulers. She derives no particle of rier power 
or right from any government. But brought into contact with 
civil governments, she gladly recognizes their rights, their duties, 

Const. Leonis xin., DC Civitatiim Constitutione Christiana, Vol. iv., p. 79. 
See Vol. I. pp. 79, 109, 241 and Vol. II. p. 153. 


their difficulties ; and, to aid them, modifies where she can her 
disciplinary laws. Where governments oppose her action, the 
Church promptly accepts every partial concession, rejoices thereat, 
and is thankful. But in her rejoicing she never forgets her own 
divine rights, her divine origin, her divine mission to the whole 
human race. 

To say Things are better with us than they might be, is 
declaring, in other words, that matters are bad with us, though 
they might be worse. It does not imply that our condition is 
a good one, or, by any means, all that it should be. Irish 
Catholics may now be thankful for the measure of civil and 
religious liberty they enjoy, as compared with what they enjoyed 
of these blessings a hundred years ago. And for it, howsoever 
obtained, they are thankful. But who would expect them, on 
that account, to stop hissing at Balfour, or gather on the hill- 
sides to sing hosannas to the British ministry. It seems to us 
that the author of The Church and the Age confounds, nearly all 
all through his work, relative with absolute good. Ever striving 
after the absolute good, the Catholic Church never hesitates to 
accept and be thankful for the relative. Of this, Leo XIII. 
emphatically reminded the Prussian and Bavarian Bishops in his 
recent letters to these bodies. But while admonishing them 
to be thankful, he admonished them likewise not to desist from 
their labors, until the Catholic Church in those countries shall 
have obtained her full rights. 

We quote from The Church and the Agt: 

To the honor of the English Catholics under Lord' Baltimore it is to be 
said that, both by the original design of the proprietary, and by the legislative 
enactments of the freemen of the province, there reigned, while their rule 
lasted in Maryland, a perfect equality among all Christian denominations, 
and to all were secured the same rights and piivilege-, civil and religious. 
This act on the part of the Colonists of Mary. and was in harmony with 
the dictates of right reason and the authentic teachings of faith ; for all 
attempts to bring by coercion men who differ in their religious convictions to 
uniformity in the profession of religious belief, if successful, would logically 
put an end to all rational religion. Compulsion never gave birth to faiih, 
which is '' not by any means a blind assent of the mind," * but essen- 
tially an intelligent and voluntary act. Convinced of this, as Catholics, the 
idea of religious tolerance flowed naturally and consistently in the minds 
of the first settlers on the shores of the Potomac. It was a noble act on 
their part to proclaim that within the province and jurisdiction of Mary- 
land no Christian man should be molested in worshipping God according 

1 Vatican Council, De Fide, ch. iii. 


to the dictates of his conscience, and whoever supposes that the Syllabus 
teaches anything to the contrary seriouly mistakes its meaning J"age 66. 

Never did the Catholic Church teach that it is light or 
proper, " to coerce men who differ in their religious convic- 
tions into uniformity in the profession of their religious belief." 

Tolerance, meaning " a perfect equality among all Christian 
denominations, securing to all the same rights and privileges, 
civil and religious," never was and never can be admitted in 
principle by the Church. In teaching it, she would be making 
herself as one of the sects. She teaches spiritual truth by 
authority of God ; the sects impiously presume to teach it on 
their own. She has a right to teach, a right God-given ; the 
sects have no right. The author's assumption, then, that 
"religious tolerance/' as explained p. 66, "is in harmony 
with the dictates of right reason, and the authentic teachings 
of the Catholic faith," seems to us without foundation. 

The authentic teaching of faith in this matter may be learned 
at a glance from the few following propositions, most solemnly 
condemned ex cathedra by Pius IX.: 

In this, our age, it is no longer expedient to have the Catholic 
religion be the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all 
other forms of worship. Prop. 77 of the Syllabus. (Supra, p. 48.) 

What then is expedient according to Catholic teaching ? Surely 
not "a perfect equality among all Christian denominations, securing 
to all the same rights and privileges, civil and religious ?" 

Hence it was wisely provided by statute in some Catholic countries, 
that strangers coming into them to reside, should be allowed, each 
one, the public exercise of his own form of worship. Prop. 78, ib. 

The contradictory of that proposition is Catholic teaching. 
Therefore it would seem that the bepraised "act of the colon- 
ists of Maryland was (not} in harmony with the dictates of 
right reason and the authentic teachings of faith." And '' as 
Catholics, the idea of religious tolerance flowed (did not flow) 
naturally and consistently in the minds of the first settlers on 
the shores of the Potomac." !oc. cit. And Leo XIII., in his 
immortal Encyclical, De Civitalum Constitution Christiana, writes : 
" States cannot, short of crime, act (as States) as if there were 
no God at all; nor can they cast aside the care of religion as 
though it did not concern them, or would be of no advantage 
to them; nor can they allow all religions indifferently within 
their borders : and in the worship of the Supreme Being they 


are bound to proceed in the manner and form in which God 
has shown he wishes to be worshipped/' 

And since the author appeals to "right reason," we must say 
that not all who appeal to reason only, in discussing this 
question, side with him. Thus the Protestant or Rationalist 
Geffchen, in a recent work, Staat und Kirche, writes : " Mutual 
indifference between the State and Religion, even if it could 
be had, is never to be desired ; because both come into con- 
tact in the most momentous crises of man's life. They do so 
in spite of every effort to lessen the chances of such contact 
for the purpose of avoiding collision or conflict. The State 
cannot afford to be indifferent to religion in the moral edu- 
cation of its citizens. Without religion there is no morality. 
The example of a few, who notwithstanding they abjure all 
religion, still lead moral lives, proves nothing against my thesis. 
For these people, though unconsciously, act on the maxims of 
morality of their day and generation, and these maxims were 
built upon a religious foundation. But the great mass of the 
nation could never of themselves, and without religion, attain 
to any degree of solid morality. Facts invincibly prove how 
vain it is to endeavor to supply the place of religion among a 
people by philosophy and scientific ethics, when these are taught 
independently of religion. The morality of every people rests 
primarily on their religion ; and when the religious faith of a 
people is gone, after it soon go all modesty and moral- 
ity. A mere negative relation, then, between Church and State, 
whereby each would be wholly indifferent to the other, if such 
a relation could be brought about, would be ruinor.s to the 
State. On the other hand, the Church cannot be indifferent to 
political matters on the plea that it is only her business to care 
for souls ; for religion must naturally concern itself with the 
things that concern man. Hence, as a matter of fact, anything 
like a perfect separation of the State from Religion was never 
attempted, much less reduced to practice. Every consideration, 
then, suggests the union of both powers ; for in their mutual 
co-operation lies the welfare of society." 

1 Civitates non possunt, citra scelus, gerere se tanquam si Deus omnino 
non esset ; aut curam religion is velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere; 
aut asciscere de pluribus generibus indifferenter quod libeat : omninoque 
debent eum in colendo numine morem usurpare modumque, quo coli se 
Deus ipse demonstravit velle. THE PASTOR, Vol. IV, p. 81. 


One more of the condemned propositions : // is false to say 
that to give full liberty to every form of worship, and to give every 
one unrestricted license openly and publicly to express his views and 
opinions, is apt lo corrupt the minds and the morals of the people, 
and to aid in spreading the pest of indifferentism. Prop. 79, (Supra, 
p. 48.) 


On the 23d of April last the Cardinal Prefect of Propaganda 
addressed a circular to the Irish bishops, informing them that 
the Holy Office had officially examined into the morality of the 
Plan of Campaign and Boycotting, and that their Eminences 
had unanimously pronounced them unlawful. This decision was 
approved and confirmed by His Holiness on the i8th of April. 
The Dubium and decision were as follows : 

Utium liceat in controversiis inter locatores et conductores 
fundorum seu prsediorum in Hibernia uti mediis vulgo appellatis 
The. Plan of Campaign et Boycotting, et ab Emis Patribus, re diu 
ac mature perpensa, unanimi suffragio responsum fuit : Negative. 

Quam profecto responsionem SSmus Pater feria IV. die hujus 
mensis probavit et confirmavit. 

R. Card. MONACO 

Die 20 Aprilis 1888. 

The .Letter of His Holiness explains the rest. The kernel 
of the case is the everlasting truth, Non licet facere malum ut 
eveniat bonum. 





Salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem. 

Ssepe Nos ex hoc apostolici muneris fastigio curas et cogitationes ad 
catholicos cives vestros contulimus : animusque Noster haud semel est 
publicis consignatus litteris, e quibus, quemadmodum sumus erga Hiberniam 
affecti, cuivis sine dubitatione appareat. Prreter ea, quae superioribus annis 
sacrum Consilium christiano nomini propagando, auctoritate Nostra, de 
Hibernia providit, satis epistohe loquuntur, quas ad Venerabilem Fratrem 


Cardinalem MacCabe, Archiepiscopum Dublinensem, semel atque iterum 
declimus : itemque oratio, quam nuperrime ad catholicos e gente vestra non 
paucos habuimus : a quibus quidem non modo gratulationes et vota pro 
incolumitate Nostra, verum etiam grati animi significationem accepimus ob 
perspectam in Hibernos Nostram voluntatem. His ipsis proximis mensibus, 
cum templum in hac alma Urbe exsedificari in honorem Patritii. magni 
Hibernorum Apostoli, placuerit, consilium quidem maxima animi propensione 
adjuvimus, reque r;ro viribus adjuturi sumus. 

Nunc vero paterna ista caritas cum in Nobis eadem perseverat, dissimu- 
lare non possumus, gravia Nobis ac permolesta accidere, quae novissimo 
tempore istinc afferuntur. Inopinatam concitationem animorum intelligimus, 
inde repente coortam, quod ea dimicandi ratione, quam Plan of Campaign 
et Boycotting nominant, pluribus usurpari coepta, sacrum Consilium perduel- 
libus Ecclesioe vindicandis uti decrevit non licere. Atque illud dolendum 
magis, non paucos numerari, qui p;>pulum ad conciones turbulentas vocare 
insistant : quibus in concionibus inconsideratas jactantur periculosaeque opi- 
niones, nee auctorifati decreti parcitur : quod ipsum longe alio, quam quo 
revera spectat. commentitiis interpretationibus detorquetur. Immo vero obe- 
diendi officium gigni ex illo neganl perinde ac verum proprininque Ecclesice 
munus neqjtaquam sit de honestale et tu'rpiiudine aclionum humanarum 
judicare. Ista quidem agendi ratio distat plurimum a professione christiani 
nominis, cujus profecto illae sunt virtutes comites, mocleratio, verecundia, 
potestati legitimae obtemperatio. Nee prczterca dccct in <*;iliss;i 1)O1IH. 
videri quodammodo eos homines imilari, qui, quod non jure petunt, tumultuose 
adipisci contendant. Et haec quidem eo sunt graviora, quia Nos omnia 
diligenter circumspeximus, ut liceret rerum vestrarum statum ac popularium 
querelarum caussas penitus et sine errore cognoscere. Auctores habemus, 
quibus jure credatur : vosmetipsos coram percontati sumus : praetereaque 
superiore anno legatum ad vos misimus virum probatum et gravem, qui 
veritatem summa cura exquireret, et ad Nos ex fide referret. Nominatimque 
de hac providentia populus Hibernus gratias Nobis publice agendas curavit. 
Num igitur non in eo temeritas inest, quod ajunt, de caussa Nos judicavisse 
non satis cognita? praesertim cum res improbaveiimus, in quibus impro- 
bandis consentiunt sequi viri, quotquot, ista dimicatione vestra non impliciti, 
pacatiore judicio de rebus existimant. 

Illud pariter non vacat injuria suspicari, parum Nos Hiberniae caussa 
moveri, et quae sit apud vos fortuna populi, non admodum laborare. Contra 
sic afncit Nos Hibernorum conditio, ut neminem magis: nihilque tarn vehe- 
menter cupimus, quam ut tranquillitatem adepti prosperitatemque meritam 
ac debitam aliquando respirent. Nullo tempore recnsavimtts, qnominus pro 
melioribus rebus suis contenderent: sed illudne ferendum videatur, aditum in 
contentione ad maleficia patefieri ? Quin immo ob id ipsum, quod, inter- 
jectis cupiditatibus politicarumque partium studiis, permixtum fas atque nefas 
una atque eadem caussa complectitur, Nos quidem constanter studuimus id 
quod honestum esset ab eo secernere, quod non esset honestum, catholicos- 
que ab omni re deterrere, quam Christiana morum disciplina non probaret. 
Quamobrem consiliis tempestivis Hibernos monuimus, meminissent profes- 
sionis catholicae, nihil unquam natural! repugnans honestati, nihil divina 
lege non concessum susciperent. Recens igitur decretum non iis debet 


praeter opinionem accidisse : eo vel magis, quod vosmetipsi, Venerabiles 
Fratres, anno MDCCCLXXXI, Dublinum congregati, clerum et populum 
cavere jussistis, qucecumque essent ordini publico caritative contraria, cujus- 
modi ilia sunt, nolle quod jure debeatur redclere, nolle reddi: personam, 
vel bona cujusquam violate: legibus, vel etiam iis, qui funguntur munere 
publico, vim opponere : in clandestina fcedera coire, et cetera generis 
ejusdem. Quae quidem praecepta, plena aequitatis maximeque opportuna, 
laudata Nobis ac probata sunt. 

Nihilommus cum populus inveterato cnpiditatum fervore transversus ra- 
peretur, nee dcessent qui novas quotidie faces admoverent, intclliximus, pne- 
cepta requiri magis definita, quam quse generatim de justitia et caritate 
retinenda antea dederamus. Pati Nos prohibebat officium, tot catholicos 
homines, quorum Nobis est in primis commissa salus, viam insistere pneci- 
pitem et lubricam quee ad evertendas res potius duceret, quam ad miserias 
sublevandas. Rem igitur ex veritate gestimari oportet: ariimumque ilium 
nostrum in eo ipso decreto Hibernia recognoscat amantem sui, optateeque 
prosperati congruentem, quia caussoe, quaniumvis justce nihil tarn obest quam vl 
et injuriis esse defensam. 

Haec, qua3 scribimus ad vos, Yenerabilis Fratres, magisterio vestro Hibernia 
cognoscat. Concordia sentcntiarum et voluntatum, ut oportet, conjunctos 
nee vestra tantum, sed et Nostra auctoritate fultos, multum vos coulidimus 
assequuturos : illud pnecipue, ut cnpiditatum tenebne ne diutius tollant 
judicium veri, maximeque concitatorcs populi temere s-o fecisse poeniteat, 
Cum multi sint qui ad deserenda officia vel certissima aucupari caussas 
videantur, date operam, ut de vi cjus decreti nullus relinquatur ambiguitati 
locus. Intelligant universi, earn omnem rationem, qua? ne adhiberetur inter- 
diximus, adhibere omnino non licere. Honestas utilitates honeste qu<Eraut 
potissimumque, ut christianos decet, incolumi justitia atque obcdientia Sedis 
Apostolica; : quibus in virtutibus Hiberuia quidem omni tempore solatium simul 
et animi robur iuvenit. 

Interea coelestium munerum auspicem et benevolentue Nostrse testem vobis 
Venerabiles Fratres, et clero populoque Hiberuo apostolicam benedictionem 
peramariter in Domino impertimus. 

Datum Romse apud S. Petrum, die xxiv Junii An. MDCCCLXXXVIII, 
Pontificatus Nostri Undecimo. 




After S. Pius V. had the Roman Catechism published, the 
Breviary and Missal reformed,' he turned his attention to the 
Little Office of the B. V. Mary: " cujus recitatio sicut pusillis 
et rudibus christifidelibus peculiaris esse dignoscitur, ita multis 
superfluis, non sine legentium etiam scandalo, et quae ad varias 
superstitiones facile rudes ipsos inducere possunt, avaritia impres- 


sorum, fuit refertum, qui ut christifideles ad emendum ejusdem 
officii libros a se impresses facile allicerent, multa sub colore 
pietatis et animirum spiritualis consolationis ex eorum capita 
addiderunt." Bull, Superni omnipotentis Da, April 5, 1571. 

As with the Breviary and Missal, St. Pius \ T ., after having 
the Officium Parvum carefully corrected, got a standard edition of 
it issued in Rome. In 1568 the same Pontiff, by the Bull 
Quod a Nobis (prefixed to the Breviary), exempted the clergy from 
the obligation of reciting the Officium Parvum according to the 
rubrics of the revised Breviary. But he earnestly exhorts them 
to continue to recite it : " Debito providentiae pastoralis admoniti, 
omnes vehementer in Domino cohortamur, ut remissionem nostram, 
quantum fieri poterit, sua devotione ac diligentia praecurrentes, 
illis etiam precibus, suffragiis, et laudibus suae et aliorum saluti 
consulere studeant." And the more to induce those now freed 
from the obligation of saying the Officium Parvum to continue 
its recitation as before, St. Pius grants them an indulgence of 
one hundred days for each recitation. " Atque, ut fidelium 
voluntas ac studium magis etiam ad salutarem hanc consuetu- 

dinem incitetur omnibus, qui illis ipsis diebus in 

rubricis praefinitis Beatae Mariae officium dixerint, toties centum dies 
de injuncta ipsis poenitentia relaxamus." 

This grant was only for those who, according to the disci- 
pline up to that date (1568) in force, were bound to the 
recitation of the Officium parvum as directed by its proper 
rubrics. It was only to such the Pontiff was addressing 
himself; the Raccolta says, quite incorrectly: "St. Pius V. 
granted to all the faithful who are bound to say the Office 
of the Blessed Virgin Mary on the days prescribed in the Rubric 
of the Roman Breviary, etc." The indulgence was granted 
mainly to stimulate those who had formerly been, but were no 
longer, bound to the recitation, to continue it as before. That 
such was the intention of the Pontiff is manifest also from the 
words used in 8 of the Bull Superni omnipotentis Dei, 1571 : 
"Ac, ut fidelium omnium voluntas et studium magis ad salu- 
tarem hujus nostri officii B. Mariae Virginis lectionem et usum 
invitetur .... omnibus et singulis, qui ad recifationem hujusmodi 
non tenentur, quoties istud devote recitaverint quinquaginta dies de 
injunctis sibi poanitentiis misericorditer in Domino relaxamus." 
The indulgence of the hundred days is gainable only by those 
who, according to the former discipline, of the Church, would 


be bound to say the little office on certain days, and is gainable 
only on those days ; the indulgence of the fifty days is gainable 
on any day by all the faithful who piously recite the 
Parvum ex devotione. 

The new concession of indulgences for the recitation of the 
Little Office does not annul that of St. Pius V. 

1. By the new concession it will be seen that a plenary 
indulgence may be gained on the usual conditions, (confession, 
communion, and prayers for the intention of the Sovereign 
Pontiff) on any day of each month by those who, whether from 
devotion or obligation, devoutly recite the entire Little Office 
every day of the month. 

2. An indulgence of seven years and seven quarantines may be 
gained each day that the entire office is devoutly recited cum 
corde saltern contrito. 

3. An indulgence of three hundred days may be gained once 
in the day by those who, with a contrite heart, devoutly recite 
the Matins and Lauds. 

Decretum TJrbis et Orbis. 

Ex audieniia SSmi diei 17 Novembris 1887. 
Pia et laudabilis jamdiu viget consuetude, longo sseculorum 
decursu numquam interrupta, apud Christifideles speciali cultu 
prosequendi Beatissimam Virginem Mariam devota recitatione 
Parvi Officii, quod in honorem ejusdem Virginis extat in 
Breviario Romano a S. Pio V. recognito et approbate. Ad 
quam praedicti Officii lectionem et usum, ut majus adderet 
incitamentum idem sanctus, Pontifex aliquas Indulgentias, nedum 
iis qui illud persolvere tenebantur diebus in Rubrica praefinitis, 
sed et ceteris Christifidelibus, quibus ex propria devotione mos 
erat ipsum recitandi, clementer elargitus est. Quo -vero ista tarn 
salutaris Christiano populo consuetudo recitandi Mariales laudes 
majus accipiat incrementum, hac praesertim aetate, qua ad 
Deiparam Virginem fidenter confugiendum est, ne tot, quibus 
undique premimur, aerumnis obruamur, SSmo Domino Nostro 
supplices exhibitae sunt preces, quatenus usum recitandi Parvum 
Officium Beatae Mariae Virginis ditiori Indulgentiarum thesauro 
promovere dignaretur. Has porro preces idem SSmus peramanter 
excipiens valdeque exoptans, appropinquante jam anno quin- 
quagesimo, a quo Sacrum primum litavit, erga sanctissimam 
Dei Genitricem suae venerationis gratique animi novum edere 


testimonium, et in Christifidelibus magis fovere studium ac 
pietatem, ut memorato laudum praeconio pergant eidem divinse 
Matri cultum exhibere et honorem, Indulgentias, uti sequitur," 
benigne concessit ; nempe: 

1. Plenariam, lucrandam quolibet anni mense, die uniuscujus- 
que arbitrio elegendo, ab omnibus utriusque sexus Ctiristifidelibus, 
qui mense integro, quotidie. Mum Parvum Officium B. Marice 
Virginis, id est Matutinum, quod uno tantum constat nocturno 
diei currentis, cum reliquis horis usque ad Completorium 
inclusive, devote recitaverint, dummodo praefato die vere poenitentes, 
confessi ad sacram Synaxim accesserint, piasque ad Deum preces 
aliquo temporis spatio ad mentem Sanctitatis Suae effuderint ; 

2. Septem annorum totidemque quadragenarum, semel in die ac- 
quirendum ab iis ChristifideHbus, qui praefatum Parvum Officium 
devote pariter et corde saltern contrito persolverint ; 

3. Tercentum demum dierum, ab iis similiter semel in die 
lucrandam, qui Matutinum tantum, uti supra, cum Laudibus 
devote ac corde item contrito recitaverint. 

Quas omnes Indulgentias eadem Sanctitas Sua animabus 
quoque Christifidelium in Purgatorio detentis fore applicabiles 
benigne declaravit. Prassenti in perpetuum valituro absque ulla 
Brevis expeditione. Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis Sacrisque 
Reliquiis praepositae die 17 Novembris 1887. 

Cajetanus Card. Aloisi Masella Prafedus. 
Alexander, Episcopus CEnsis, Secretarius. 

To gain these indulgences, should the Lit'le Office be recited 
in Latin ? This question we should be unwilling to decide. 
On the one hand, St. Pius V. granted the indulgence only lo 
the recitation " of the corrected office, as set forth in the typ- 
ical edition, and absolutely prohibited all others with two ex- 
ceptions : " illis tamen officiis exceptis, (dummotlo vulgar! 
sermoiie, ut praefertur, non siiit composite,) 
(i) quae ab ipsa prima eorum institutione a Sede Apostolica ex- 
presse approbata fuerint, vel (2) quorum officiorum certum usum, 
consuetudine aut ipsa institutione, supra tamen ducentos annos, 
assidue in ecclesiis, monasteriis, domibus et locis utriusque 
sexus ecclesiasticorum, observatum fuisse constat." 4. of Bull 
Superni. St. Pius, therefore, banishes all offices of the B. 
Virgin written or printed in the vernacular, even those expressly 


approved by the Holy See or sanctioned by the continuous 
usage of over two hundred years. His intention manifestly was 
to proscribe any and every office whatsoever of the B. V. in the 
vernacular. He therefore did not intend to reward the recita- 
tion of any such office with indulgences. The indulgences, then, 
granted by St. Pius V. were evidently restricted to the recitation 
in Latin of the Officium Parvum as corrected under his direc- 

On the other hand there is the decree of the S. Congrega- 
tion of Indulgences, dated Dec. 29, 1864, (THE PASTOR, Vol. 
I., p. 142,) in which we read: "In an audience granted the 
undersigned Cardinal Prefect, Dec. 29, 1864, His Holiness 
Pius IX. was pleased to declare that the indulgences at- 
tached to any prayers can be equally gained, no matter in 
what language the prayers be said, if only the translation be a 
faithful one. Although fidelity of the translation be thus made 
a conditio sine qua non of gaining the indulgence, yet a version 
is hereby declared sufficiently faithful for the purpose, which has 
been approved by His Eminence the Cardinal Prefect of the 
Sacred Cong, of Indulgences, or by any of the ordinaries of the 
place in which the language of the translation is in common use." 

Did the preceding words comprise the entire decree, we should 
have no hesitation in saying the indulgences granted by St. Pius 
can be gained by the recitation in the vernacular. But the 
context of the decree seems to point unmistakably to what are 
commonly understood by the expression indulgmced prayers and 
more particularly to the prayers published, whether in the origi- 
nal or translation, in the collection known as the Raccolta. Now, 
first, the recitation of the Little Office to which the indulgences 
are annexed could hardly be described as an indulgenced prayer; 
and, secondly, the Officium Parvum was not given in the ver- 
nacular, neither in the original Raccclta, nor in the English ver- 
sion of the work edited by the Jesuit Fathers of Woodstock and 
especially approved by the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation. So 
far as we know, there is no vernacular version of the Officium 
Parvum clothed with any manner of approbation, no vernacular 
version the recitation of which would entitle one to the in- 
dulgences granted by St. Pius V. It is certain that the recita- 
tion of a vernacular version approved by an ordinary would not 
be valid for the indulgences previous to 1864. The Sovereign 
Pontiff granted the indulgences and prescribed the conditions for 


gaining them. Among these is emphatically that of saying the 
office in Latin. It must certainly remain very doubtful whether 
Pius IX., when approving the decree of 1864, intended to alter 
a condition for gaining those indulgences so positively and re- 
peatedly insisted on by Pius V. It does not seem to us that 
he did. 

And connected with this is another doubt : Did Leo XIII. , 
when recently extending or adding to the indulgences formerly 
granted by St. Pius V. for the recitation of the Parvum Officium. 
mean that recitation in Latin, which alone St. Paul had in mind ? 

The words of the introduction to the concession of Novem- 
ber 1887 seem haidly to admit of a doubt that Leo intended 
to indulgence the same act of devotion that St. Pius indulgenced. 
" A pious and praiseworthy custom has long existed among the 
faithful, and has come down through ages without interruption, 
of paying a special worship to the Blessed Virgin Mary, by the 
devout recitation in her honor of the Little Office as found in 
the Roman Breviary revised and approved by St. Pius V." 
Mark, there is no question of the recitation of any of the 
offices which were extant and in use in those days, but only 
of that particular Parvum Officium "quod exstat in Breviario." 
The recitation of a translation thereof or of any office whatever 
in the vernacular was not only not indulgenced, but was pos- 
itively and expressly- forbidden. And "to the reading and use 
of the office aforsaid, prout exslat in Breiiario, the saintly 
Pontiff annexed certain indulgences." Thus far there can be no 
doubt that Leo contemplated the identical devotional act that 
Pius meant to indulgence, namely, the recitation in Latin of 
the Officium Parvum. " And that this custom (so fruitful of 
good to the faithful) of reciting the praises of Mary may be 
still more widely spread, a petition was presented to His Ho- 
liness, imploring him to promote the spread of the usage of 
reciting the Officium Parvum by a grant of indulgences more 
munificent still." 

The usage already indulgenced was solely that of reciting the 
Latin office ; and it was ista tarn salutaris Christiana populo 
COnsuetudo, of reciting the Office, namely, in Latin, which 
the Pope was petitioned to enrich with indulgences richer still 
than those granted the recitation by St. Pius, ditiori indulgtn- 
tiarum thesauro promovtre dignaretur. "Has porro preces idem 
SSmus peramanter excipiens, etc." The preces were that he 


would enrich with still greater indulgences a devotional act which 
St. Pius V. had already indulgenced. That act in the one case 
was beyond any doubt the recitation of the Officium Parvum in 
Latin ; Leo seems to have made no change beyond still further 
indulgencing the same act. 

The Little Office, in whole or in part, is generally recited at 
the weekly meetings of sodalities of the Blessed Virgin. For the 
most part it is said in the vernacular ; a,nd in the vernacular 
can be said with more piety and devotion by the generality of 
sodalists than it could be in a jargon of sounds or syllables 
having no earthly meaning to reader or listener. But are the 
indulgences gained ? Directors of sodalities should make an effort 
to get the question solved. 


The following decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites 
needs no comment. It was not unexpected. For the documents 
referred to see THE PASTOR, supra p. 97 seq. (Febr. 1888.) 


Diuturnis Ecclesue acerbitatibus, ac teraporum quotidie invalescente difficul- 
tate commotus, Sanctissimus Dominus Noster LEO Papa XIII cmictos a sui 
Poutificatus exordiis ubique christiauos excitare non (Jestitit ad Deiparura 
Virginem Mariam sacii Rosarii ritu colendam atque implorandam. Inter ce- 
tera quag praeclare edocuit in sna prima de Rosario Encyclica (1 Septembris 
1883) ait: Divini necessitas auxilii haud sane est hodie minor, quant cum 
magnus Dominions, ad publica sananda vulnera, Marialis Rosarii usum invexit. 
Ille vero ccdesti pervidit lumine, (etatis suce mails remedium nullum prcesenlius 
futurum, quam si homines ad Christum,, qui via, veritas et vita est, salutis 
per Sum nobis partoz crebra commentaiione rediissent ; et Virginem illam cui 
datum est cunctas hcerfses interimere deprecatricem, apud Deum adhibuissent. 
Idcirco sacri Rosarii formulam ita composuit, ut et sahdis nostrce mysteria or- 
dine recolerentur, et liuic meditandi officio mysticum innecteretur sertum ex ange- 
lica salutatione contextum, interjeda oratione ad Deum et Patrem Domini Nos- 
tri Jesu Christi. Nos igitur non ab simili malo idem qucerentes remedium, non 
dubitamus quin eadem hcec a beatissimo viro tanto cum orbis catholici emolu- 
mento, inducta precatio, momenti plurimum habitura sit ad levandas nostrorum 
quoque temporum calamitates. Pontificise voluntati permagna animorum alacri- 
tate et concordia ubiqtie locorimi obtemperatnm est, ut luculenter apparueril 
quardus religionis et pietatis ardor extet in populo christiano, el quantam in cce- 
lesti Mariaz Virginis patrocinio spent, universi reponant. (Encyclica 30 August! 


1884.) Hujusmodi porro spei veluti prseclarus fructus, jure nunc accenseri 
debet meraorabile factum quod hoc anno, sacerdotii ejusdem Sanetissimi Do- 
mini Nostri quinquagesimo, Dcus ostendit: mirandum profecto publicse reli- 
gionis et fidei exemplum, pulcherrimum honestissimumque pietatis certamcn 
in toto christiano orbe inter omnigenas liEtitiae significationes exhibitum. 
Omnes hominum ordines, vel ex dissitis terrarum partibus, gestierunt prosequi 
Pontificem Sutnmum, beati Petri successorem, omni genere officii : Icgationi- 
bus, litteris, peregrinationibus etiam longinquis ultro susceptis, oblatisque in- 
genti nuinero et effusa magnificeiitia muneribus, de quibus verissime dictum 
est, materiam et opus propensione superari voluntatis. Qua scilicet in re ad- 
mirab' 1 'liter fidget Dei benignitat et virtus, qui in magnis Ecclesice laboribus vires 
ejus confirmed ac : qui pro nomine suo certantilus solatia tribuit : qui 
providentioe suae consilio ex malts ipsis, uberem bonorum messem eduxit : fulget 
item Ecclesice gloria, quae originis vitaeque 'SUCK vim divinam ostendit ac divinum 
quo regitur vivifyue ynritum : quo Jit ut fidelium mentes et voluntates uno 
eodemque vinculo invicem, itemque cum supremo Ecclesiae Pastore jungantur. 
(Allocut. Consistor. 25 Novembr. 1H87.) 

Jamvero id perpendentes Catholicorum gentes, durn inferorum portae quotidie 
audaciores fiunt in bello adversus Kcclesiam urgendo, probe sentiunt quanto- 
pere oporteat in potentissimam Dei Matrem augere fervorem, augere fiduciam 
ut per Rosarii preces exorata, nomine Christiano et Apostolicse Cathedrae 
propitia succurrat ; mernores velle Deum donorum suorum continuationem at- 
que implementum non solum bonitatis suae, sed etiam perseverantiae nostrae esse 
fruclum. (Breve Apost. 24 Decembr. 1883.) 

Quapropter ad gratias agendas pro acceptis beneBciis, et pro concedendis 
enixius deprecandum, Beatissimus Pater qute superioribus annis per Suas 
Encyclicas, ct per Sacrorum Rituum Congregationis Decreta (20 August! 
1885-2(5 August! 1886-11 Septembris 1887) de salutaris sacri Rosarii ritu 
prsesertim toto mense Octobri celebrando, statuit et hortatus est; eadem 
omnia hoc vertente anno fieri mandat ac vehementer hortatur. Et quoniam 
plura de ampliori cultu liturgico magnae Yirgini sub titulo Rosarii exhibendo 
jam decrevit ; novum addere adhuc volens incrementum, sacrum festum 
ejusdem Rosarii solemnitatis, Dominicse primje Octobris adsignatum OFFICIO 
PROPRIO CUM MISSA decoravit, ilhidque ab utroque clero in posterum re- 
citari pnecepit, juxta superius schema quod, a Se recognitum et probatum 
per eamdem Sacrorum Rituum Congregationem hac ipsa die edi mandavit. 

Nonis Augusti, in festo Beatae Marias Virginia ad Nives. anno 1888. 


"Doleremus si inter ipsos etiam sacrcrum ministros inveni- 
rentur, qui homines in externa notoriaque haeresum professione 
defunctos catholicis ritibus honorarent, ac pro iis quoque, quos 
srhisma a nobis separavit, incruentum misses sacrificium offere non 
rfornnrfarent." 1858, Tit. IX., Cap 4., n 4. 



Rescript by which an indulgence of 300 days is granted for 
the saying of the Ave Man's Stella. It can be gained only 



Beatissime Pater: Vincentius Leo Sallua Archiepiscopus Cal- 
cedonen. humiliter provolutus ad pedes Sanctitatis Vestrae, 
exorat ut benigne concedere dignetur omnibus fidelibus, qui, 
corde contrito ac devote recitaverint Hymnum Ave Man's Stella . . . 
in honorem B. Virginis Marioe, ceu jacet in Breviario Romano, 
indulgentiam tercentum dierum, semel lucrandam in quolibet 
die. Quam gratiam etc. 

Ex Audientia Sanctissimi diei 27 yanuarii 1888. Sanctissimus 
Dnus Noster Leo Papa XIII benigne annuit pro gratia juxta preces. 
Praesenti in perpetuum valituro absque ulla Brevis expeditione. 
Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum Romae ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis 
Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae die 27 Januarii 1888. 

Cajetanus Card. Aloisi Massella Prczfedus. 
Alexander, Episcopus CEnsis, Secretarius. 

Rescript by which an indulgence of 50 days is granted for 
the recitation of the De Profundis, with the versicle Requiem 
seternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis. This 
indulgence may be gained three times a day, and is applicable 
to the souls in purgatory. 


Beatissime Pater: Antonius Grasselli Archiepiscopus Colossen. 
humiliter provolutus ad pedes Sanctitatis Vestrae, exorat ut conce- 
dere dignetur aliquam indulgentiam fidelibus cunctis quoties, corde 
contrito ac devote, recitaverint psalm um De Profundis cum 
versiculo in fine Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua 
luceat eis. Quam gratiam etc. 

Ex Audientia Sanctissimi diei 2 Februarii 1888. SSmus Domi- 
nus Noster Leo Papa XIII omnibus utriusque sexus Christifide- 
libus qui corde saltern contrito ac devote recitaverint praedictum 
psalmum cum adnexo versiculo Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, 
et lux perpetua luceat eis, benigne concessit indulgentiam, de- 


functis quoque applicabilem, quinquaginta dierum ttr in die lu- 
crandam. Praesenti valituro in pirpetuum absque ulla Brevis expe- 
ditione. Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum Romae ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis 
Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae die 3 Februarii 1888. 

Cajetanus Card. Aloisi Massella Praeftctus. 
Alexander, Episcopus CEnsis, Secretarius. 

His late Holiness, Pius IX., granted an indulgence of 300 days 
to all who meditate for some time on the Sorrows of Mary any 
day in September. His present Holiness, Leo XIII., grants a 
Plenary indulgence to all who repeat the devotion every day 
during the month. 


Beatissime Pater. Petrus Franciscus M. Testa, Prior generalis 
Ord. Servorum Mariae, humiliter provolutus ad pedes Sanctitatis 
Vestrae exponit, ex benigno indulto s. m. Pii Papae IX., ante- 
cessoris Vestri, concessam fuisse indulgentiam tercentum dierum, 
lucrandam quolibet die mensis Septembris, a fidelibus cunctis, 
qui corde saltern contrito ac devote pium peragant exercitium 
mense Septembri ad meditandos dolores B. Mariae Virgin is, 
quolibet utendo libro, dummodo approbate, qui agat de dolori- 
bus ejusdem B. Mariae Virginis. Nunc, eo consilio, ut fideles eo 
magis excitentur ad recolendos dolores SSmae Virginis Mariae, et 
ex hujusmodi pio atque utili exercitio spiritualia ilia charismata 
percipiant, quae illud parere solet animabus piis, Sanctitatem 
Vestram exorat, ut concedere dignetur indulgentiam plenariam 
illis, qui, praedicta ratione, integro Septembri mense, Virginem 
perdolentem piis obsequiis sint prosequuti, semel lucrandam 
recensito mense, eo die, quo vere contriti, confessi atque sacra 
refecti Synaxi preces effuderint juxta intentionem Sanctitatis 
Vestrae. Quam gratiam etc. 

Ex Audientia Sandissimi did 27 yanuarii 1888. Sanctissimus 
Dominus Noster Leo Papa XIII omnibus utriusque sexus 
Christifidelibus, qui modo super enunciate, quolibet die mense 
integro Septembri, Dolores B. M. Virginis sive publice sive 
privatim devote recoluerint, petitam plenariam indulgentiam de- 
functis quoque applicabilem benigne concessit, lucrandam eo die, 


infra prsedictum mensem uniuscujusque arbitrio eligendo, quo 
vere poenitentes, confessi sacram synaxim susceperint, et aliquo 
temporis spatio ad men tern Sanctitatas Suse pie oraverint. 
Praesenti in perpetuum valituro absque ulla Brevis expeditione. 
Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum Romas ex Secretaria S. Congregation is Indulgentiis 
Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae die 27 Januarii 1888. 

Cajetanus Card. Aloisi Masella Praefectus. 
Alexander, Episcopus CEnsis, Secrelarius. 


A sanctissimo Domino Nostro Leone XIII., literis editis in die solemn! 
Paschatis vertentis anni quum prseceptum fuerit, ut in cunctis Catholic! 
orbis ecclesiis patriarchalibus, metropolitanis et cathedralibus ultima Dominica 
proxime venturi mensis Septembris specialis missa defunctorum, majori, 
quo fieri potest, solemnitate celebretur, simulque data fuerit facultus ejusdem 
missae celebrandae in omnibus aiiis ecclesiis parochialibus et collegiatis, et 
ab omnibus sacerdotilms, dummodo ne omittatur missa officio diei respondens 
ubicumque est obligatio ; insequentia dubia super ejusmodi mandate Sancti- 
tatis Suse pro opportuna declaratione proposita sunt, nimirum. 

I. An concessa sit clispensatio, sru commutatio obligationis turn missse 
pro populo, turn missse cujuscumque omnino diei affixae, ita ut minime 
transferri valeat. 

II. An verba dnmwodo ne ommittahir missa officio diei respondens 
ubicumque est obligatio, intelligenda sint tantummodo de ecclesiis, in quibus 
ea die fit officiatura choralis ? 

III. An ubi occurrit festivitas ex solemnioribus ex. gr. patroni, titularis 
et dedicationis ecclesire sufficiat missam pro defunctis applicare, sefvando 
ritum festivitati cohterentem? 

Hisce porro dubiis a Sacra Rituum Congregatione jussu ejusdem Sanctis- 
simi Domini Nostri rile perpensis, Sacra ipsamet Congregatio rescribendum 
censuit: Affirmative in omnibus. 

Quibus per infrascriptum Secretarium eidem Sanctissimo Domino Nostro 
relatis, Sanctitas Sua rescriptam Sacrse Congregationis approbavit, illudque 
per prsesens Decretum evulgari mandavit. Die 6 Junii, 1888. 

A. Card. BIANCHI, S. R. C., Prafectus. 


Certum est "pueros post septennium teneri observare qualitatem 
ciborum ab ecclesia praescriptorum." S. Pcenit, 15 Martii, 1857. 

1 See Supra, p. 161. 



A learned Liturgist thus concludes a long article in the 
Ephemerides Liturguce for April : 

" Igitur non possumus quin concludamus : 

Regula circa ordinem commemorationum certa et ad mentem 
S. R. C. ac in praxi tenenda hasc est : Post orationem officii in 
Vesperis p>imu/n fit commemoratio de alio offido concurrent, dummodo 
simplex non sit ; deinde fit commemoratio : 

1. De Dominica privilegiata. 

2. De die octava quacumque. 

3. De duplici majori ad ritum simplicem redacto, cum superest. 

4. De duplici minori item ad instar simplicis redacto. 

5. De Dominica per annum. 

6. De die infra octavam Corporis Christi. 

7. De semiduplici ad ritum simplicem redacto. 

8. De die infra octavam communem. 

9. De feria majori. 

10. De simplici' etiamsi de illo in crastino agatur officium. 
n. Suffragia consueta sanctorum. 


All publications to be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the Editor, Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranford, N. J. 

RUDIMENTS OF THE HEBREW GRAMMAR, Translated from the seventh Latin 
edition of Vosen-Kaulens " Rudimenta," by H. Gabriels, Rector of St. 
Joseph's Seminary Troy, N. Y. Small octavo, pp. viii 129. B. Herder, 

" How long would it take one to learn Hebrew?" asked a 
student of Dr. Beelen, professor of Scripture in Louvain. "At 
two hours' study a-day," replied the professor, "it would take 
from three to four months." The greatest obstacle to the study 
of Hebrew is the fear of it. The next is that those who do 
begin, do not begin resolutely, and, by hard work for a few 
weeks, get over that part which is disagreeable to the beginner 
in any language. Hebrew, the professor explained, is necessarily 
an easy language the easiest. For whereas other languages have 


their literatures, of greater or less extent, the whole of the 
Hebrew language is found in the one Book the Bible ; and if 
we there count the roots on which the language is built up, 
they will be found to be very few indeed. The Hebrew Grammar 
is as easily learned as the grammar of any other language. 
But when you have mastered the grammar in Hebrew ycu know 
the language. So argued Dr. Beelen. Bossuet was forty years 
of age, we are told, before he looked at a Hebrew grammar. 
Yet Bossuet became a fine Hebrew scholar, for his day. 

Dr. Gabriel does not claim much for his Rudiments: "They 
fully answer the requirements of the one year's course of Hebrew 
prescribed by the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore ; while 
for scholars, desirous of ampler knowledge, they prove a useful 
and solid introduction to more exhaustive grammars." They do 
more. They give in a clear, methodical manner all that is 
needed of grammar by the theologian. The longer grammars 
run all into philology and the cognate languages. The student 
is bewildered. With this little book, on the contrary, he is 
taken along from one point to another with easy step, and the 
reason of things is invariably given : The Notes (not foot-notes) 
are invaluable, and taking text and notes together, we doubt 
whether there is more to be found in the most pretentious work. 
The Hebrew type is really beautiful evidently little used, if 
hot bran new. But the vowel signs, especially that of tsere, are 
too small, and the pips two close. We could prefer larger type 
and more legible vowels to match. 

We have looked carefully through the twelve pages of the 
vocabulary appended. It is not only sufficient, but good. .Still, 
for beginners, a few pages more ' might have been advantageously 
added, giving, under their own lettering, some of the parts of 
the verb with the meaning of these parts. 

After one week's hard work to become familiar with the 

strange forms and names of the letters, verbs, affixes, and prefixes, 

any young man, with Gabriel's grammar and a good dictionary 

in hand, will find the study of Hebrew both easy and pleasant. 

AXTHOI.OGIA MIKRA, Little Anthology. A Collection of Fables, Descriptions, 

and Maxims, containing the Roots of the Greek Language, by the Very 

Rev. Canon Manonry. Translated with the Author's permission from 

the twenty-fourth French edition. Octavo, pp. v 286. B. Herder, 1888. 

EPISTOLA Beati Paul! Apostoli ad Romanes analytice et logice explicata a 

P. Josepho Agus, S. J. Large octavo, half morocco, pp. 812. Pustet 

& Co. 1888. 


and edited from the original Latin by George J. Davie, M. A. Exeter 
College, Oxford. St. Matthew's Gospel, Chapters i xiv. Large octavo, 
cloth, pp. xxx 482. John Hodges, London, 1888. 

ELEMENTS OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAW, Vol. ITT. Ecclesiastical Punishments. 
By Rev. S. B. Smith, D.D. Large octavo, cloth, pp. 380. Benziger 
Bros., 1888. 

the Order of St. Benedict. Vol. I*. Octavo, cloth. John Hodges, 
London, 1888. 

DISHONEST CRITICISM: Being a Chapter of Theology on Equivocation and 
doing Evil for a good Cause. An answer to Dr. Richard F. Littledale. 
By James Jones, S. J.. Professor of Moral Theology in St. Beuno's 
College. Octavo, cloth, 1888. John Hodges, London, 1887. 

LOURDES: Its Inhabitants, its Pilgrims, and its Miracles. "With an Ac- 
count of the Apparitions at the Grotto, and a Sketch of Bernadette's 
subsequent history. By Richard F. Clarke, S. J. Octavo, cloth, pp. 224. 
Benziger Bros., 1888. 

THE PRACTICE OF HUMILITY : A Treatise, composed by Our Holy Father 
Pope Leo XIII. Translated from the Italian (with the special per- 
mission and blessing of His Holiness), by Dora Joseph Vaughan, O.S.B. 
24mo, cloth, pp. 145. Burns and Gates. London. The Catholic Publica- 
tion Society Co., New York. 

LIFE OF LADY GEORGIANA FULLERTON. From the French of Mrs. Augustus 
Craven by Henry James Coleridge, S. J. Octavo, cloth, pp. xix-504. 
Richard Bentley & Son, London, 1888. 

THE SUNDAY SCHOOL COMPANION. 16mo, cloth, pp. 244. Benziger Bros. 

The five first books in the preceding list are of peculiar in- 
terest to ecclesiastics, and we can only regret that we cannot, in 
this issue, say all we feel bound to say of them. The translation 
of Maldonatus is really a masterpiece. The translator is not a 
Catholic. But if the learned Jesuit could speak from his grave, 
he would desire no more honest chronicler, no moie faithful in- 
terpreter. So far as we could discover, there is not a line in 
the work which would suggest a suspicion that Mr. Davie is not 
a Catholic. He is neither Catholic, nor Jew, nor Protestant, in 
this work. He is Maldonatus, and Maldonatus only. We Catho- 
lics, especially our junior clergy, ought to be thankful to Mr. 
Davie. Dr. Smith's volume we think far above its predecessors. 
Later on we shall say why we think so. Fr. Agus' learned 
volume, we do not so well like. We had rather he had more 
Scripture in it, and leave theology to its own field. 

"Opto magi's seniire compundioncm quam sa're ej'us definitionem. " a Kempis. 



No. ii. 


There is not a priest in the United States who does not 
know that olive oil alone, olive oil exclusively, is the only oil 
he is allowed to burn in the sanctuary lamp. The oil sold 
by Messrs. Stoltzenberg is confessedly not olive oil, not even an 
adulterated olive oil. It is not, therefore, sanctuary oil, and no 
priest in the United States can use it in his sanctuary lamp 
without sin, unless he be excused (a.) by ignorance ; or (6.) by 
explicit permission of his bishop. 

A very scandalous abuse has been most unwarrantably built 
on a decision of the Sacred Congregation of Rites issued in 
1864, for a case or condition of things wholly exceptional. 
That case was this : By the Concordat of 1803 between Napoleon 
and the Holy See, the number of parish priests provided for in 
the new dioceses was cut down to a very small fraction of the 
number that had formerly been, far below the number required 
to meet the absolute necessities of the faithful. Often, where 
ten or twelve parishes were needed, and had formerly existed, only 
one was created under the terms of the Concordat. But some 
provision was made for sustaining some few assistants for ' the 
parish priest. These assistants were allowed a mere pittance, 
not as much as a common laborer could make. But it was 
the best the Holy See could do, and the hard terms were 
accepted. The voluntary system by which the clergy of England, 
Ireland, and the United States are maintained, was unknown in 
France. The priests had to depend mainly, if not entirely, on 
the insignificant allowance doled out by the Government. But 
the churches of the former parishes remained. The legal vicars 
of the legal parish priest were severally placed in charge of 
these churches by the bishops. Nominally and coram lege these 
churches remained chapels-of-ease, succursalistce. Coram lege the 
men placed in charge of them still remained assistants, and for 
Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 


keeping house and the other necessary expenses incurred in the 
discharge of the duties of a parish, they still received only the 
paltry allowance of a hundred or a hundred and fifty dollars a 
year in many cases, less. These men were pinched for the 
very necessaries of life, pinched from one year's end to the 
other. Dimes to them were a circumstance. Economy in every 
direction, economy in the smallest things, was a vital necessity. 
In favor of these priests, not of all France, the Right. Rev. 
Prelates, seeing that olive oil cannot be procured without 
considerable cost magnis sumptibus (relative, of course,) "to keep 
even one lamp burning day and night in the sanctuary, 
petitioned the Apostolic See to say whether under such 
circumstances, and considering the difficulties of the case and 
the poverty of the churches, it would not be lawful to use 
some other vegetable oil besides olive, or even to use petroleum." 

Mark, now, that this was a petition. The bishops who 
made it admitted, what all the world knows, that only olive 
oil should be used in the sanctuary lamp. They admitted 
further that of their own authority they could not permit the 
use of any other oil, vegetable, animal, or mineral. If it were 
a case of absolute impossibility to procure the olive oil, they 
would not and need not have petitioned. Ad impossibile nemo 
tenetur. But the incommodum was truly gravissimum, not for 
all, but only for the poorer churches. In some cases it 
amounted to a moral impossibility. The presence of this moral 
impossibility makes the question half-theological, half-liturgical. 
Does the liturgical law in that particular bind sub tanto incom- 
modo ? A theologian may at once say Nay. But the theologian 
is not the last nor the competent judge as to the binding 
force of liturgical laws. The incommodum was detailed to the 
supreme court and lawgiver, and the question was asked: Does 
lhat particular law, of the existence . of which there is no doubt, 
remain binding on those poor priests who can observe it only 
cum incommodo tanto? The question is so narrowed that the 
answer can concern no priests, of France or elsewhere, except 
those men steeped in poverty in the little hamlet parishes of 
France. The answer can have no more reference to our mis- 
sions or parishes in the United States, than it can have to the 
wealthy churches of Paris. 

We have seen the question and its circumstances. Let us 
now carefully note the answer : 


"While the Sacred Congregation is ever anxious that in this 
matter, as in all others, the custom handed down to us from 
the very infancy of the Church should be retained, namely, of 
burning only olive oil, on account of its mystic significations, yet 
it cannot make light of the difficulties expounded by the Rt. 
Rev. Bishops : and, therefore, having first taken the opinions of 
two of the Apostolic masters of ceremonies, the undersigned 
Cardinal Prefect of the same Congregation proposed the whole 
matter at the usual session held to-day at the Vatican." 

Let us pause a minute. To hear some persons talking, one 
would think the liturgical law touching the species or particular 
kind of oil to be used in the sanctuary lamp, was a matter 
of trifling moment. The question as asked was equivalent to 
this : Is that liturgical law, prescribing the use of olive oil 
exclusively in the sanctuary lamps, of very grave moment ? 
Now the fact that no hasty answer was given, the circumstance 
that the vota of two consultors, with the usual learned arguments 
pro and con, were called for and carefully considered by their 
Eminences, and the particularity with which it is stated in the 
reply that the fullest consideration had been given to the subject 
before a decision was reached "omnibus accurate perpensis ac 
diligentissime examinatis," plainly show the very dullest of us, 
that the members and officials of the Sacred Congregation of 
Rites deemed it no light thing to decide whether, even in the 
case of those poverty-stricken priests of the interior of France, 
the use of vegetable oil could be lawful. 

In their case a decision was finally reached. But care was 
taken so to word the decision that it can never by any possi- 
bility be construed into a general rule by priests. After the 
significant preamble given above, in which the great reluctance 
of the S. Cong, to assent to any departure from early custom 
and tradition in this matter is gravely set forth, the reply pro- 
ceeds: "But their Eminences of the. Sacred Congregation of 
Rites, after considering this whole business with care and the 
utmost diligence, judged proper to reply : As a rule olive oil 
ntlist be used: but where thai oil cannot be had, it is left to the 
discretion of the bishop to permit the use of some other, but this 
other shall, if possible, be a -vegetable oil. (5331.) 

We really cannot conceive how so clear an answer was ever 
so foully misinterpreted as was that. Both in the preamble and 
the direct answer, the declaration is distinctly made that olive 


oil only is the materia liturgica for the lamp of the sanctuary. 
Next, in the direct answer, all priests are absolutely forbidden, 
whether they can procure olive oil or not, to burn, of their 
own authority, any other oil whatever in the sanctuary. Conse- 
quently, if driven to it, they are bound, according to the un- 
mistakable meaning of this decision, rather to keep the Blessed 
Sacrament without a lamp, than set up a lamp with any other 
kind of oil before it of their own authority. This is the law, 
and the binding law, the present law, not an obsolete one, a 
law binding per se sub gravi. 

And now for the exception. May a priest ever decide for 
himself when he would be justified in using some vegetable 
oil, not olive ? Never. Why ? Because totidem verlis the right 
to decide in each particular case, or at least in each particular 
diocese, is left to the discretion, not of the priest, but to the 
discretion of the bishop only. " If, in any place, whether a 
hamlet or a whole diocese, "olive oil cannot be had" 
then, aild then Only can the ordinary use his discretion, 
and say either that the Blessed Sacrament shall be kept without 
a light, or that some other oil, vegetable or mineral, shall be 
burned in the sanctuary. Bishops can permit kerosene just as 
they can permit any vegetable oil. They can permit neithei 
when it is possible to procure the proper oil. 

After quoting the decision above given, (Gardellini 5331)' 
De Herdt continues : " Utendum est igitur oleo olivarum : si 
hoc haberi nequeat, per se tamen alia olea adhiberi ncn pos- 
sunt, sed remittitur prudentise episcoporum ut ipsi alia olea 
permittere valeant." 

In one event, and one only, the ordinary can permit, 
if he choose to have a light before the Blessed Sacrament, the 
use of an oil that is not oil of olives, the moral im- 
possibility of procuring olive oil. 

The bishop is never obliged to use this faculty. 

If rectors cannot procure the olive oil, they are absolutely 
forbidden, without the bishop's express permission, to use any 

. In few parts of this country is there at present any moral im- 
possibility of procuring olive oil. From five to ten dollars 
worth would last a lamp for a year. There may be some ex- 
ceptional places in the West, in favor of which the bishop may 
have grounds sufficient to permit the use of vegetable or kero- 


sene oil. But few missions at which there is a resident priest 
are so utterly poor or so inaccessible as not to be able to 
procure olive oil. Only to a want of study of the question 
must be attributed the use of the forbidden oils by some of 
our opulent congregations. These oils should be discarded at once. 

Now a word for Mr. Stoltzenberg : No one save the proofreader and 
compositors saw the article headed Oil fnr the Sanctuary Lamp, p. 223, 
supra, before it was printed and published. No one but the proofreader 
and compositors see any of the articles that go in THE PASTOR, until the 
number is printed and bound. To the young man at 53 Barclay St., who 
saw fit to grow, or pretend to grow, so wroth over the May number, I 
now repeat most distinctly that any oil, by whomsoever palmed off on a 
bishop or priest as sanctuary oil for Carholic churches, is an imposition, if 
not olive oil. If he can read the foregoing article and not see the palpable 
truth of my assertion, he is duller than he seems to be. But whether he 
sees it or not, it is a fact. The oil he advertises and sells as "Sanctuary 
Oil" is not sanctuary oil. Why? Because, as he admits, it is not olive 
oil. There are dozens of vegetable oils. It matters very little, it matters 
nothing which one of them it is, or which oils it is a combination of. 
Of vegetable oils there are any number, since oils are abundant in nearly 
all seeds, as well as in the tissue, of plants. So we have the oils of 
turpentine, bergamot, birch, chamomile, caraway, cloves, elemi, hop, juniper, 
lemons, orange, parsley, savine, valerian, linseed, mustard seed, cotton seed, 
etc., etc., in endless varieties. All these are vegetable oils, and all are just 
as much sanctuary oil, and just as lawful, as that sold at 53 Barclay St. 
Just as lawful, for no one of them, nor any mixture of any number of 
them, would be sanctuary oil. Sanctuary oil in the Catholic Church is 
olive oil ; and olive oil, and olive oil only, is sanctuary oil, 

The subjoined note was needless. As its publication was requested, I 
give it space : 

August 25, 1888. 
Messrs. STOLTZENBERG & Co. : 

We hereby certify that the sample of the so-called Stol- 
tzenberg's English Sanctuary Oil furnished us by you, is a sample of pure, 
unadulterated vegetable oil, without any mineral or animal substance. 
Very Respectfully, 


Just as lawfully, just as truthfully, Mr. St<>ltzenberg, nay any merchant may 
rush on the market, by judicious advertising, a cotton seed, linseed, mus- 
tard seed, or any other vegetable oil, and pass it off as genuine sanctuary 
oil. This, however, we gladly say in favor of Mr. Stolzenberg : He 
does not pretend that his oil is olive oil. So, if priests covet being 
duped, it is no fault of his. In admitting it is not olive oil, he admits 
it is not sanctuary cil. 

"English sanctuary oil!" ye gods and little fishes, what a name! And 
there is not an olive growing in England, nor has a gill of sanctuary oil 


been ever made in England, and every priest in England uses olive oil 
only in his sanctuary lamp, as he is bound to do. It is with this sanc- 
tuary oil as with the chalices that were more plentiful a few years ago 
than they are now things made of inferior metal. Only chalices with 
cup of silver and gilded on the inside, or cup of solid gold, are allowed 
by the rubrics. But the others were industriously sold by enterprising 
merchants, and I myselt was fooled by one of them. I had to throw it 
aside when I discovered it was not silver. In like manner, those who 
have Stoltzenberg's sanctuary oil (?) will be obliged to throw it aside and 
get olive oil for their sanctuary lamp. There is hardly a priest in the 
United States who cannot afford the little yearly outlay, and the little 
extra trouble of putting a new taper on the float every morning, either 
for priest or sexton ! one ought to be ashamed to complain of doing that 
little in honor of the Adorable, and in filial respect for the laws of the 



(Continued from p. 344, Vol. V.} 

Sane vehementer dolendum esset, 
necnon in magnum ecclesiae nostrre 
detrimentum verti oporteret, si insig- 
nes leges et ordinationes majorum 
nostrorum paulatim negligerentur vel 
oblivioni traderentur. Decreta enim 
ista, (conciliorum) ut plurimum, leges 
ecclesice universales interpretantur et 
explicant. Qua; quidem decreta a 
prselatis doctrine et experientice in- 
signis condita atque a Sede Aposto- 
lica recognita, certe cuju?cumque pri- 
vati auctoritatem superant." Father 
Innocent \Vappelhorst, in Compendium 
Sacra Liturgia. 

Before F. Wappelhorst published his Compendium, we began, last 
year, to call the regulations made by the Third Plenary Council 
to the recollection of our confreres. " We shall simply state the 
law as it is, with here and there a word of our own in elucida- 
tion, or our opinion as to what was meant, when the text admits 
of more than one interpretation." Vol. V., p. 305. We con- 
tinue : Paragraph 21 : "Consultores eligentur ad triennium." 
The Propaganda suggested to the archbishops, in 1883, the 
advisability of creating chapters of canons. These would enjoy 
certain rights defined by the sacred canons, and, in the enjoy- 


ment of these rights and privileges, they would be wholly inde- 
pendent of the ordinary. To begin with, they would retain 
office for life. Then their advice and consent would be required 
for the validity of a hundred acts, and their presence would 
connote some curtailment of the ordinary's powers. But the 
.archbishops positively refused to create the canonical chapters. 
They pleaded that the circumstances of the country would not 
warrant them in doing so. It would certainly be a violent 
break from our customs and the traditional mode of ecclesiasti- 
cal regime in the United States. It may be piously hoped 
that, when the next plenary council is held, the ecclesiastical 
status of priests will have so far progressed towards conformity 
with the general discipline of the Church, that the bishops will 
have no fear of calling canonical chapters into existence. It is 
really not easy to see why the United States should not have 
them as well as Ireland, England, Holland. The consultors 
"ad triennium " are merely nobodies. The bishop can take 
the advice of any priest or layman as well as theirs, and is 
as much bound to be said by one as by the other. The 
consultor who is exposed to the danger of being shelved next 
year, practically degraded, would be a fool to tender unpal- 
atable advice. Ordinary mortals wont do so, and still less the 
personce gratce sure to be named as consultors. 

If a bishop find occasion to remove a consultor before the 
lapse of three years, he advises with the remaining consultors in 
regard to filling the vacancy, but names whom he pleases. 
Though the question is not decided by the Council, we presume 
that the new nominee goes out of office with his senior con- 
freres, and that his appointment is only to fill out the unexpired 
term of his predecessor. 

If the three years' term expire during a vacancy of the see, 
the consultors hold over for six months, or until the successor 
in the see name his own. This he ought to do within six 
months after his consecration. If he neglect to do so, and 
for the neglect there is no penalty of any kind, the office of 
the consultors simply becomes vacant. 

Not individually, but as a body, are the consultors to give 
their advice. They may express their views, however, by secret 
ballot, whenever they choose to do so, on any point presented 
for their consideration. No weight is attached to the majority 
vote. On what side the majority lies will be known only to 


the bishop, and, in any case, he can do as he likes in the 
matter. It is, of course, presumed, but not provided for, that 
the opinions of those good six men and true will influence, 
to some extent, the ordinary's action. 

Four times a year the consultors shall be assembled, or twice 
at least, where such frequent meetings would be inconvenient. 
If occasion occur they may be summoned to assemble to advise 
on any special business for which their advice is required by 
the Council. 

During the vacancy of a see the administrator holds the same 
relation to the consultors that the bishop did. But in case of 
the death or removal of a consultor the administrator cannot 
name his successor. He can exercise only the powers expressly 
granted. Among these is not found that of filling vacancies in 
the college of consultors. 

Paragraphs 24-25 : In synod, the bishop shall appoint ex- 
aminers of the clergy, or out of synod with permission of the 
Holy See. These examiners are to conduct the concursus for 
the vacant irremovable rectorships. 

This might as well have been omitted, for there is no concursus. 
(THE PASTOR, IV., 178.) 

The general law of the Church formulated by the Council 
of Trent, Sess. xxiv., cap. 18, is worded: " Examinatores singulis 
annis in dioecesana synoda ab episcopo vel ejus vicario ad 
minus sex proponaniur, qui synodo satisfaciant, el ab ea probentur." 
Benedict XIV. writes (De Synodo di&c. 4, 7, 3): " Propositi 
ab episcopo officium non assequuntur, nisi approbentur a synodo; 
unde necesse est, ut major pars eorum, qui synodo intersunt, in 
illos consentiat: secus, alii ab episcopo erunt proponendi, qui 
a majore parte acceptentur. Posse autem hanc acceptationem 
fieri per suffragia turn publica turn secreta, respondit Sacra 
Congregatio Concilii, die 11 Junii, 1592." But if the approval 
or disapproval of the clergy is to be signified by secret ballot, 
not in the bishop's hands but in those of tellers appointed by 
the synod should the ballots be deposited, and by these tellers 
should the ballots be counted. Any other course would be 
absurd on the face of it, and leave it in doubt whether the 
names proposed were approved or not by the majority. 

The examinatores rleri are really required only for the con- 
cursus for vacant parishes. As there is no concursus, there is 
no real need of the examiners. For all other examinations the 


bishop can appoint any priest or priests he likes. The men 
named by the bishop as examinatores cleri without any assent 
of the clergy, J are mere nullities, coram lege, and in styling 
themselves examinalores ckri or examinatores synodales are but 
usurping a title, very harmlessly to be sure, vvnich does not 
belong to them. Without the assent and approval of the 
majority cf the diocesan clergy in synod assembled the ordinary 
cannot constitute an official examiner of the clergy. However, 
there is no need of examiners, until the contrivance permitted 
for the time being by the Holy See to take the place in this 
country of the proper ecclesiastical concursus be either given 
up or forbidden. 

As our examiners are not those contemplated by the Council 
of Trent, they are not to be required to take the oath of 
office prescribed Sess. xxiv., cap. 18, nor would they incur the 
penalties there announced for bribetaking. Paragraph 21 says 
or seems to say that they are bound. But the reference therein 
made to Benedict XIV., proves that the Fathers were speaking, 
as Benedict in the passage referred to was, only of canonically 
elected examiners, not of men who before the law fill no 
official position in a diocese. When we shall have the canoni- 
cal concursus we must have canonically elected officials, known in 
the law as examinatores. Then our examiners will be examiners 
re, not nomine, and will be bound to take the oath of office. 

" Synodalium examinatorum officium durat usque ad novam 
synodum, quse intra unius anni spatium, ad Tridentini normam, 
esset celebranda, et in qua aut iidem, aut alii de novo depu- 
tandi forent, sicuti idem Tridentinum Sess. xxiv. Cap. 18, De ref. 
praecepit. Quid autem fiet si annus elabatur et nova synodus 
non celebretur ? Certum est, statim ac annus effluxit ab ultima 
synodo, cessare officium eorum examinatorum, qui intra ejusdem 
anni intervallum, in demortuorum seu absentium locum fuerint 
ab episco suffecti : ita enim diserte statuit Clemens VIII. 
Quoad alios non subrogatos sed in synodo electo?, hoc censuit 
Sacra Cong. Concilii : Quamdiu sex illorum superstites sunt, 
(quoniam longe plures proponi et eligi posse, jam diximus,) 
omnes perseverant in munere ; sed si ex electis in synodo sex 
non remaneant, omnium officium expirat ; neque, post annum, 
datum est episcopo in demortui locum quemquam sufficere." 

1 For instance, see Preface to the Second Synod of Brooklyn, held in 
September, 1887. 


Benedict XIV. De Syn. iv., 7, 8. Of course, these thing do 
not apply to those erroneously styled synodal examiners in this 

Of deans and vicars forane little can be said. For the present 
they are to be regarded merely as deputies of the ordinary, and 
must confine their actions strictly within the powers explicitly 
deputed to them. 

The duties, the powers, and the privileges of deans were 
always, as they are to-day, an uncertain quantity. All were 
evolved and regulated by custom, so that, at the present day 
as in the past, the attributes of deans materially differ, even in 
contiguous dioceses. As there exists no custom to define their 
duties in the United States, the ordinaries explicitly assign them 
a few, properly leaving it to time to develop, extend, or curtail 
these duties. Thus the archbishop of Cincinnati : " Decanorum 
officium erit (a.) singulas missionum ecclesias et scholas Catholicas 
decanatus quoque anno visitare ; (<$.) ecclesiarum et scholarum 
conditionem investigare ; (c.) moribus et vitse sacerdotum ac eorum 
in cura animarum industrial invigilare ; (d ) infirmos sacerdotes 
inspicere, et defunctorum exequiis moderari ; (e. ,, sacrorum vasorum 
et omnium, quae ad cuhum divinum pertinent, decentiam exqui- 
rere ; (/.} collationes (theologicas) convocent, dirigant, et confectas 
ad deputationem nostram cum notis suis et secretariorum 

"Decanorum pariter erit nos comitare in visitatione ecclesiarum 
districtus sibi demandati. Possunt etiam minores defectus pres- 
byterorum, absque tamen figura judicii, corrigere, eorumque 
jurgia leviora amice componere. 

"Semel in anno, mense Januarii, nobis reddere debent rationem 
in scriptis eorum omnium, quorum cura ipsis demandata fuit. 

" Concilium Bait. II. exoptat ut decanis ampliores facultates 
tradentur ; attamen, ad omnem confusionem evitandam, nullas 
-praeter super enumeratas sibi vindicent, nisi in scriptis ampliores 
ipsis facultates tradiderimus/' Synodus Cincinnaten. 1886. 

It is obvious that the dean will need to bring a great deal 
of tact and prudence to the performance of these disagreeable 
duties, and be himself a model to the clergymen of the deanery. 
Otherwise his work will be fruitless, if he do not, indeed, 
become the laughingstock of the priests. J 

1 Quid est D E c A N us? Est Deferens Episcopo Causas Alienas Non 
Vero Suas. 


On the other hind, there is no doubt that a dean who has 
the confidence of the clergy, and is not spying out for faults 
only, but for points to praise as well, will find his work made 
as agreeable as such work can be, by his confreres. The deans 
and vicars forane are the successors of the odious testes synodales. 

The office of these testes had to be vacated entirely. "Nemo 
profecto est qui rion videat quantum illorum opera ad rectam 
conferret dioecesis administrationem. Nihilominus difficile, ne 
impossibile dicam, est hujusmodi homines invenire, qui velint 
id muneris capessere : enimvero quanquam, ut omnem ab illis 
arcerent invidiam, jamdiu cosperint episcopi testium nomina in 
synodo non publicare, non propterea tamen, quos exoptassent, 
allicere potuerunt ad prsedictum munus acceptandum. Praesto 
siquidem ii essent, qui illud affectarent, ut charitatis et zeli 
praetextu, possent pro libito, huic aut il'i sibi inviso, falsum 
crimen appingere ; sed viri vere probi et integerrimi, qui omni 
seposito humano affectu, veritatem investigent, eamque sincere 
episcopo, solo charitatis studio, aperiant, desiderari quidem pos- 
sunt, sperari tamen non possunt. Quare synodales testes fere 
ubique desueverunt ; in eorumque locum suffecti sunt decani, 
hoc est, vicarii foranei, qui utique, si doctrina, pietate, prudentia, 
et zelo prczstarent, ac munus suum diligenter obirent, synodalium 
testium defectum supplerent et compensarent. De Syn. iv., 3, 8. 

The office of dean or vicar forane, being merely a personal 
delegation, is not necessarily a concomitant of the rectorship of 
any particular church. Nay, in the beginning it was rather 
desired that they should have no parish. " Vicarios foraneos 
in oppidis insignibus, vel ubi episcopi necesse judicaverint, ad 
sui beneplacitum ipsi constituant ; iique curam ne habeant ani- 
marum, quantum fieri pottst, pro viribus sludeant." Cone. Rom., 
1725. But, without a cura or benefice, or any real jurisdiction, 
spiritual or temporal, annexed, the hateful office of vicar forane, 
like that of the testes synodales, was doomed to go a-begging. 
If they would preserve the office at all, the bishops were, in 
a measure, constrained to annex it to some or other of the 
more desirable parishes of the deanery. This has been gener- 
ally done, and promotion to that particular parish carries with 
it, in many places, the appointment of the incumbent as dean. 
But the office of dean being merely a personal delegation, it 
does not belong to any one parish more than another. Conse- 
quently the dean's successor as pastor is not necessarily his sue- 


cessor as dean. Another priest can just as well be deputed. 
For the same reason the office is always ad nutum episcopi. 
But this ad nutum does not mean that the bishop can lawfully 
transfer, of his own whim, and without good reason, the 
deanship from one priest to another. (See THE PASTOR, 
IV., 52.) 

From the bishop's explicit delegation, not from anything in 
the office, are derived the dean's prerogatives. As dean, he 
has no more jurisdiction outside of his own parish than any 
other parish priest. "Non potest in festis et functionibus cele- 
brandis in ecclesiis plebanatus privative quoad parochum ecclesiae 
vesperas et missam solemniter canere, sed potius ad libitum 
rectorum earumdem ecclesiarum." S. Cong. Concilii, 15 Julii, 
1775. And: "An in functionibus atque exequiis in iisdem 
ecclesiis piebanatus celebrandis et peragendis, ad archipresbyterum 
spectet missam solemnem celebrare functionesque agere, atque in 
omnibus quoad paroch'um aliosque sacerdotes plebanatus praece- 
dere et prajeminentiam habere, in casu ? 

Resp. S. C. C. : Negative quoad parochum ; in reliquis serven- 
tur constitutiones synodales. Ib. (Muhlbauer, I., p. 1080.) 

Attamen " Decano competit jus praeeminentiarum super clerum 
et sacerdotes decanatus in omnibus functionibus, in quibus 
intervenit totus clerus." Ib. 

The order of precedence among the priests of Cincinnati is 
set down as follows : (i) vicar-general ; (2) the rector of the 
seminary ; (3) the consultors ; (4) deans ; (5) the irremovable 
rectors, examiners, and professors of the seminary ; '(6) ordinary 
rectors ; (7) assistants. In each class, seniority, not of age 
but of ordination, gets precedence. 

Though a distinction is sometimes made between the offices 
of arch-priest, dean, and vicar-forane, the words are used as 
synonyms in most law books. 

Valde magnum est in obedientia stare, sub praelato vivere, et 
sui juris non esse. Multi sunt sub obedientia magis ex necessi- 
tate quam ex caritate. Illi pcenam habent, et leviter murmurant. 
Imaginatio locorum et mutatio, multos fefellit. Curre hie vel 
ibi, non invenies quietem nisi in humili subjectione sub pralati 



* * * * La., June 30, 1888. 

REV. SIR : If only to have the subject discussed, a good many priests 
as well as myself would wish to see the question of Round Dancing 
broached in THE PASTOR. 

In the twelve years of my priesthood I have occupied two posts : one, 
as assistant to a priest who time and time again condemned all who 
danced round dances ; another, as successor to a priest who was once 
challenged to a duel f r what he had said in the pulpit concerning round, 
dances. Both these gentlemen, armed with a false translation of the famous 
paragraph No. 472, of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, invariably 
refused absolution to all those who danced round dances, unbss they 
promised not to dance them any more. In 1878, having some scruple 
of conscience concerning the practical prudence or the theological correct- 
ness of this course, which, led by example and without much inquiring 
into the matter, I had myself adopted, I wrote (the bishop being absent) 
to our vicar-general, S. T. D., concerning the matter. From him I received 
a reply from which I quote: "That round dances are forbidden by the 
natural law (our nature being what it actually is) I am certain. We 
refuse Communion here to those who will not give them up." The part 
concerning the natural law surprised me more than ever. I then cousulted 
a bishop for whose opinion I have the highest respect, and he replied : 
" I attended the Council of Baltimore. ... we discountenanced round dances, 
but did not condemn them." This year a bishop, who did not, however, 
attend the Second Council of Baltimore, issued a Pastoral in which are to 
be found the following expressions : " We recommend you. ... to shun 
those offensive, loathsome round dances, condemned by both the natural 
law of decency and the positive law of the Church." In his Compendium 
Theologia: Moralis, Sabetti says, n. 191 : Ad legitimandam praxim eorum 
confessariorum, qui indiscriminatim absolutionem denegant iis omnibus qui 
choreas ducunt apud nos vulgo dictas round dances, non valet dicere istas 
chorreas damnatas fuisse a Patribus Baltimorensibus. Etenim Patres Balti- 
morenses, cum in Lilteris Pastoralibus prsedictas chorasas nominant, non 
preceptum imponunt, sed solum monitum prsebent. . . . Cum vero decreto 
472 severius loquuntur, non solum nullam mentionem faciunt de istis 
choraeis in particular!, sed neque preceptum fidelibus omnibus imponunt, et 
tantum exigunt ut pastores animarum "choreas immodestas insectentur ac 
prosus damnent." Quid de his omnibus ? Now, in my parish, in spite of 
the efforts of my predecessor, in spite of my own indirect way of proceed- 
ing against them, they are danced yet, and in all likelihood they will 
continue to be danced by Catholics. I should like to hear your opinion 
in the matter, and am anxious to know the modus agendi throughout the 
North. The subject must have been brought up in the Third Council of 
Baltimore, but why it was not decided one way or the other remains a 

Yours, " R." 

We have no doubt that the vicar-general alluded to by 

334 7'HE PASTOR. 

"R" spoke of the natural law only in a loose sense. Taken 
in their literal meaning, his words express a false opinion, one 
that no philosopher or theologian would subscribe to. "Round 
dances are NOT forbidden by the natural law, our nature being 
what it actually is." Only those think so whose notions of the 
natural law are erroneous, and who, in consequence, confound a 
thing or an act which may have a tendency more or less re- 
mote to induce a violation of the natural law, with the things 
or acts forbidden by the law. Nor is it merely a confounding 
of cause with effect, but of occasion with result. Between 
cause and effect there is always a real, often a necessary 
connection. But between occasion and result, there is no real 
link at all, no necessary one, surely. 

The divine law is defined by St. Thomas (r. 2, q. 91, art. i) : 
That reason, existing in the divine mind, according to which the 
universe is governed. This is the law eternal. Descending then 
to the natural law he writes (Ibid. art. 2.) : "There is in man 
a certain natural Jaw, which is a participation of the divine law 
and according to which man discerns good from evil. As law is a 
rule or measure, it can be conceived as it exists in the thing 
measuring, or as it exists in the thing measured. Now, since 
all things are measured by the divine law, all things participate 
to seme extent in that divine law, to the extent namely of its 
application to them as a rule or measure, whence, too, 
they have aptitudes for the actions and the ends for which they 
were made. Hence there exists in the rational creature a par- 
ticipation of the divine reason, and through this participation 
the rational creature has a natural aptitude for the actions and 
the end for which it was made. This participation of the 
eternal law or reason, possessed by the rational creature, is 
termed in him the natural law" 

Whatever is contrary to this natural law, then, is contrary 
to the eternal law, the divine reason. "Lex cElerna," writes 
Ferraris, " est ordinatio quaedam divinse voluntatis ab aeterno 
fixe determinantis, quae sint agenda vel cavenda a creatura 
rationali ut debitum finem assequatur." In contradiction to this 
is the lex temporalis. This was called into existence in time. 
The one is eternal, uncreated in God : the other is created. 
It had its beginning with man. Both are in reality the same 
law, but conceived in God, as in mensurante; in man, as in 
mensurtoa. That reason existing in the divine mind according to 


which the universe is governed, in so far as it is applicable to 
man, in mensurato is for man the natural law. 

Ferraris proceeds : "In lege naturali objectum, ex se, neces- 
sario, ab intrinseco, habet quod sit (rational! naturae) conveniens 
aut disconveniens, bonum aut malum. In lege vero positiva, 
sive a Deo sive ab homine condita, objectum, solum ab ex- 
trinseco, libere, et contingenter, a voluntate legislatoris positiva, 
habet quod sit conveniens aut disconveniens, et quod sit obii- 
gans. Unde quae a lege naturali sunt prohibita, ideo, sunt pro- 
hibita quia in se, ex se, et propter se sunt mala. Quae autem 
a lege positiva sunt prohibita, ideo sunt mala, quia prohibita." 

Thus in Brooklyn round dancing 'may be in all cases sinful, 
as it seems to be there forbidden by the positive law of the 
bishop. We read in the statutes of 1887 : 

Cboreis quce passim hodie Germanicae dicuntur, et quce a binis, viro* 
scilicet et muliere, manibus vel corporibus mutuo apprehensis orbiculatim 
duci solent, et vulgo Round Dances nominanlur, condemnationis notam 
mordicus hucusque inussimus. Si quam hac in re laxitatem anteacto tern- 
pore admiserint sacerdotes, sciant in posterum hujusmodi choreas nullo 
pacto permitti licere. Sedulo ergo invigilent sacerdotes ne in festivitatibus 
ab ipsis vel a socieiatibus sub ipsorum potestate constitutis, dandis, supra- 
dictae choreas vel similia, quie in dedecus religionis cederent, permittant. Et 
sciant confessarii se suo muneri non satisfacere si ullo modo, aut sub ullo 
praetextu, eas permittant aut excusent. 

Of the wisdom of making such a law for Brooklynites in 
1887, it is not ours to judge. Confessors will remember that 
the statute follows the general rule as explained Supra, p. 298. 
It is never wise to enact a statute that nobody is going to 
heed. The contempt with which the law is treated, is often, 
however unreasonably, extended to the lawgiver. 

Still, in Brooklyn, if the law is actually in force, and in- 
tended not only to forbid priests to allow round dances at the 
festivities under their control, but also to prohibit round dancing 
to the laity, Catholics in that diocese would certainly commit 
sin by taking part in the prohibited dances. Not, however, 
because round dances are per se a violation of the natural law, 
but because they would in Brooklyn be a violation of a positive 
law which we assume to be binding on the consciences of 
Catholics. But the statute was not framed, we think, in this 
sense. Its object is to impress on priests the necessity of dis- 
countenancing a mode of amusement, which, while not necessarily 
immoral in se, may easily become an occasion of sin. The 


expressions used in pastorals, in sermons, in the monila given 
by the ordinary at retreats, conferences, and the like, do not 
constitute positive laws. All these things remain within the 
limits of cautions, of advice. They beget no obligation distinct 
from the pre-existing natural or divine law, and are intended 
only to enforce the observance of one or the other. See 16 
of the Constitution Liber tas, Supra, p. 267. 

Whatever, then, is not malum in se, necessario, ab intrinseco, 
sed malum contingenter tantum, id non est prohibitum lege 
naturali. What is malurrf, non in se, sed contingenter tantum, ideo 
tantummodo est malum quia a libera legislatoris voluntate pro- 
hibetur. Dempta hujusmodi voluntate, seu lege positiva, res est 
indifferens, non prohibita. 

The reason of this is evident from the very definition of the 
natural law : // is the dictate of divine wisdom communicated by 
God to all men by the light of reason, prescribing the things that 
are conformable to reason, forbidding the contrary, and permitting 
what is indifferent. Schmalzgrueber. Or, as Konings explains, 
rather than defines: "Lex naturalis est divina voluntas, naturali 
lumine manifestata, prsecipiens ea, quae ad rectum ordinem 
servandum sunt necessaria. Hinc lex naturalis nihil aliud est, 
quam lex ceterna, naturae rationali per lumen naturale intimata, 
sive habituaiiter per rectam rationem, sive actualiter per ejus 
dictamen." Et-ideo "objectum legis naturalis est id omne, 
quod rationali naturae ita vel convenit vel disconvenit, ut ab 
ipsius naturae Conditore praecipi vel interdici necesse sit." God 
himself could not but prescribe these things, and forbid those. 
And further, his divine ordinance, in all that concerns this 
natural law, is communicated to man by God himself, per 
lunun rationis. 

Theologians discuss what may be ih particular prescribed or 
forbidden by the natural law. But all are agreed that those 
general precepts of morality which are evident to all, as "You 
should not do to another what you would not have another do to 
you" as well as those conclusions therefrom that have an 
evident connection with the primary precepts, come under the 
natural law. "Ilia omnia praecipiuntur, quce honesta sunt, et 
non e converse." Schmalz. The things prescribed or forbidden 
by the natural law are prescribed or forbidden only because 
they are in se, et propter se, bona vel mala. " Ideo lex dicitur 
positiva quia aliquid ponit seu superaddit legi naturali, quod ex 


se non est intrinsece bonum vel malum/' Maschat, Instiiutiones 
Can. "Hinc etiam fit, ut dispensatio proprie dicta in lege 
natural!, ne dicam ab ullo homine, ne a Deo quidem 
concedi possit ; Deus enim neque malum morale quodquam 
committendi licentiam dare, neque quod inlrinsece malum est, 
pro sua voluntate non-malum reddere potest." Ib. 

"Quare, si qua exempla quandam dispensationem prae se ferre 
videntur, prorsus alia explicatio danda est, nimirum mutationttn 
objecti legis esse factam. Quod ut magis intelligatur, attende, 
triplex esse genus objectorum quae legis naturalis prohibitioni 
subsunt : 

1. Sunt objecta, quae in se et propter se mala sunt haec 
igitur nunquam evadere possunt non mala, nee licita. 

2. Sunt objecta, quae in se quidem, at non propter se, sed 
propter periculum conjunctum, mala sunt atque illicita hasc si 
periculum auferri vel diminui potest, evadere possunt non-mala. 

3. Sunt objecta, quas in se et propter se quidem mala sunt, 
at non absolute et immediate, sed propter connexum jus alienum ; 
quare qui in illud jus potestatem habet, eandem actionem 
materialem, quae alias illicita esset, licitam reddere potest : 
immutati manente lege natural!, quae solum prohibet jus alienum, 
quamdiu jus alienum manet, laedere." Lehmkuhl, n. 190. 

Regarding the precepts of the natural law, it is well to 
remember that the object of these precepts is to be thought of 
not speculatively, but as clothed with all circumstances. For 
instance, by the natural law borrowed money should be returned. 
But money borrowed of John, who is now using all the money 
he can raise to devastate his country, should not be returned. 
Here it is not the natural law that is changed, but the law's 
object. It still remains true, as an abstract proposition, that 
loans should be repaid. See Summa i. 2, q. 94. a. 4. Schmalz. 
Dissert. Pram, ii., 74 and authors passim. This change of object 
Lehmkuhl is understood to mean in n. 2 supra. "Foimaliter et 
proprie loquendo lex naturalis mutari non potest : materialiter 
vero, improprie et indirecte, potest, si scilicet materia et objectum, 
circa quod versatur lex, per certas circumstantias recipiat muta- 
tionem. Patet in voto, cujus obligatio est juris naturalis, et 
cessat, quando materia voti cessat esse possibilis, aut de meliori 
bono ; nam non mutatur ipsa lex naturalis quippe quae in 
ialibus drcumstantiis nunquam obligavit ad observationem voti." 
Schmalz., 1. c. 


To assert, therefore, that a thing is forbidden by the natural 
law, is to assert not only that it is in itself and of itself intrinsi- 
cally evil, but that it is evidently so; or, at least, that it is 
necessarily and evidently connected with what is intrinsically evil, 
so that without the intrinsic evil it could not have being. It 
would not only be absurd to insist that round dancing is a 
thing of this sort, but it would be a scandalous calumny. 
XVhat ! to declare in public that nor man nor woman ever took 
part in a round dance, ever could take part in one, without 
at the same time sinning against chastity! " Honi soit qui 
mal y pense." The possession of wealth may lead to ruin. 
But the possession of wealth is not on that account contrary 
to the natural law. It does not, per se, necessarily lead to 
ruin. Round dancing may lead to perdition. But there is no 
necessary connection between round dancing and sin; and so 
long as there is not, round dancing is not, per se, forbidden by 
the natural law. 

Instead of sending a challenge to the pulpit orator who, in 
his ignorance of what the natural law is, grossly, in all likeil- 
hood, calumniated the challenger and those most dear to him, 
the indignant Southerner would have done much more wisely to 
have had recourse to the bastinado. The challenge was only 
a flash in the pan. 

No one need be told that, when round dancing, or any 
other kind of dancing, or anything whatsoever, no matter how 
harmless in itself, is found to be, in the case of an individual, 
a proximate occasion of sin, the harmless thing is forbidden to 
that individual. It is not forbidden of itself, or because it is 
this thing or that, but because in this particular case it has 
a connection, morally necessary, with the sin. "Sunt objecta, 
qua? in se quidem, at non propter se, sed propter periculum 
conjunctum, mala sunt atque illicita: hsec, si periculum auferri 
vel diminui potest, evadere possunt non-mala." As long as the 
sin remains morally inseparable from the harmless act, he who 
will not refrain from the latter, manifestly accepts and consents 
to the former. 

"These clergymen, armed with a false translation of the famous 
paragraph 472 of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, 
invariably refused absolution to all who danced round dances, 
unless they promised not to dance them any more/' Armed 
with a false translation ! When writing expressly for publication, 


especially over initials, one ought to be sure that he keeps 
strictly within the lines of truth. We must be permitted to 
doubt whether there was ever a priest in the United States who 
would need a translation of paragraph 472. There may be a 
mistake as to the application of the principle or teaching of that 
paragraph ; but the Latin is so simple, no one bound to recite 
the divine office could possibly misunderstand the meaning of 
the text Apart from the preceding one, (471) paragraph 472 
is not intelligible. We quote them both : 

471. Novura etiam in dies experiuntur proesertim juvenes peccandi pericu- 
lum, cum modis omnibus conentur potestates tenebrarum harum eos per 
sensuum illecebras ad ea, qure mundi et carnis sunt, Deo posthabito, 
allicere. Qua in re curare debent ordinarii, ut animarum pastores oves 
suas a malo cohibeant. A theatris itaque et scenicis ludis, iis praesertim 
qui mali et periculi pleni esse noscuntur, prudenter fideles avertant. Curent 
tamen, ne, nimio rigorosas sectando sententias, libertatem evangelicam 
coarctent. Si qui enim hujusmodi sint ludi, quae nee peccandi periculo nee 
scandalo obnoxii sinl, iis adstare laicis permitti potest. Inter concionandum 
vero, generalibus et gravibus verbis in eos animadvertant ludos, qui, ut 
plerumque fit, nonnisi peccandi ansam prsebent. 

472. Choreas immodestas, quee quotidie magis magisque frequentantur, 
insectentur et prorsus damnent. Moneant fideles, quantum non solum in 
Deum, verum in societatem et familiam seipsos denique offendant, qui 
choreis hisce vel operam dant vel saltern prrcsentia sua favere videntur. 
Parentes preecipue doceant, .quam gravis judicii rei fiant, si tenellam filiorum 
ac filiarum retatem puritatis et animi candoris amittendi periculo objiciant, 
tolerando ut hoc modo diaboli laqueis incauti irretiantur. 

Does, either of these paragraphs insinuate any discretionary 
power to refuse absolution ? It is not easy to express in 
language, befitting our own self-respect, what we think of the 
men who acted as "R" says his predecessors did. The basti- 
nado would not quite come up to their deserts. If you have 
a vicar-general who refuses communion inducriminatim to all who 
will not vow never to dance a round dance, it is only one 
proof more going to show what a superfluous lot nay, noxious 
vicar-generals may become. 

The bishops of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore 
were not fools. Neither were those of the Third. By both 
Councils a serious admonition was given to parish priests of the 
doty incumbent on them to counteract, as far as in their 
power, "prudenter," the effect of allurements to sin. Among 
these allurements are naturally set down lascivious theaters and 
lascivious dancing. 

We cannot see on what principle the vicar-general acts: 


" We refuse Communion to those who will not give up round 
dancing." He dare not. The Roman Ritual is to be followed, 
and the Ritual's directions are : 

Arcendi sunt publice indigni, quales sunt excommunicati, interdict! mani- 
festeque infames, ut meritrices, concubinarii, foeneratores, magi, sortilegi, 
blasphemi et alii ejus generis publici peccatores, nisi de eorum poenitentia 
et emendatione constet, et publico scandalo prius satisfecerint. 

For intelligent readers it would be superfluous to underscore 
any words in that paragraph. And that law is undoubtedly 
odiosci; and consequently to be restricted in application to its 
very narrowest letter. It is needless to add that there is not 
the slightest authority in the text for excluding from holy 
Communion those who dance round dances, "si publice petant." 
Again : 

Occultos peccatores, si occulte petant, et non eos emendates agnoverir, 
repellat (parochus) : non auiem si publice petant, et sine scandalo ip^os 
prceterire nequeat. 

Except in these extreme cases " Fideles omnes ad sacram 
communionetn admittendi sunt." Riluale. The priest is there 
to minister to the faithful, not to general them into his peculiar 

" We recommend you. ... to shun those offensive, loathsome 
round dances condemned both by the natural law of decency, 
and the positive law of the Church. Pastoral Letttr. Well, we 
have seen round dances, and for that matter square ones, too, 
so danced as to make the performers disgusting. It is. against 
this manner of dancing the bishop cautions his flock. If he 
mentions round dances it is only because these afford perhaps 
easier facilities and a more manageable cloak for illicit liberties. 
Sabetti is correct. Neither round nor square dances are con- 
demned as such ; but dances, round, square, oblong, or 
triangular, are condemned when danced immodestly. The 
immodesty, however, is generally an accidental, not a necessary, 
adjunct. There can be round dancing without it, as well as 
square. By all means let priests follow the precept of the 
Council of Baltimore, and inveigh against immodest dancing. 
But as round dancing can be as modest and harmless as any 
other kind, they must beware of denouncing it as necessarily, 
intrinsically, sinful. Confessors must deal with their penitents 
individually, and treat round dancing as any other occasion of 
sin. To some it may be, to others it may not be a proximate 
occasion. To the former it is forbidden ; to the latter it is 


not. Sabetti is a safe guide. So is Konings, nn. 295 and 
,1441. "In singuHs juvenibus et puellis maxime considerari 
debet periculum, quod subeant. Quare si illis sive ipsae choreae 
sive earum circumstantiae sunt proxima occasio, aut choreae plane 
sunt interdicendae, aut saltern, accedente aliqua causa vel neces- 
sitate pro accessu ad choreas, circumstantiae ita mutari debent, 
ut occasio non amplius sit proxima/' Lehmkuhl. 

A mode of dancing now so generally practised in high life 
and low, a dance that not orlly can be, but, as we believe, is 
for the most part indulged in by young and old, married and 
single, without sin, a dance "in qua nee ratione nuditatis nee 
ratione gestuum aliquid notabiliter inhonestum agitur," a dance 
in which the people do not see and obstinately refuse to 
believe there is harm, and which, do what we may, they will 
not refrain from, that dance we may dissuade them from as 
possibly dangerous, and absolutely forbid it to penitents to whom 
it is a proximate occasion of sin, but we cannot and should not 
speak of it as absolutely and necessarily immoral, nor expect, 
nor compel, nor even advise persons to pledge or bind them- 
selves never to take part in it, or be present where it is going 
on. Such a promise, if made, would be rash and unreasonable 
for the generality of people, and therefore void. Unless accom- 
panied by some sinful circumstance external to the dancing, 
very few people now-i-days accuse themselves in the confessional 
of having taken part in a round dance. 

In talking of these dances, whether in the pulpit or con- 
fessional, priests should beware of creating false consciences, 
and being themselves the cause of sin. Round dances are not, 
per se, forbidden by the natural law, they are not forbidden to 
Catholics by any positive law of the Church. At the . next 
presidential ball, whether Cleveland or Harrison be elected, a 
number of Catholic ladies and gentlemen are sure to be present, 
and take part in the dance. Neither his Eminence, nor the 
theologians of Baltimore, will warn their flocks against attending, 
nor will they for a moment harbor the thought that all who 
dance at the ball, Catholics or Protestants, are eo ipso guilty of 
a grievous", wanton sin. In decent society, this dancing is merely 
ceremonial, and any approach to undue liberty would be in- 
stantaneously perceived and resented. The amorous tete-a-tetes 
never pass beyond the pretty platitudes current in society, and 
which, as everybody understands, mean particularly nothing. 


As a frequent occasion of sin, not perhaps so much in 
itself as in its circumstances, we must discourage round danc- 
ing. But let this be done in the manner suggested by the 
Council of Baltimore, " prudenter." Let it be done without 
creating false consciences, or provoking indignation against the 
Church and ecclesiastical authority and legislation. 


**.*** Louisiana, Feb. 10, 1888. 

Does a local indult to give freemasons Christian burial stand good and 
valid after the promulgation of the Encyclical Humanum genus, or does 
the Encyclical invalidate all such ? 

Joseph * * * *. 

A canon of interpretation universally admitted is, that local or 
personal privileges, whether acquired by custom or concession, 
are not annulled by general legislation, unless mentioned in 
particular, or unless they come under a class of privileges 
mentioned by name, and, as a class, all recalled and^annulled. 

We know nothing of the local indult referred to by our re- 
spected Louisiana correspondent, but very strongly suspect that 
he labors under a mistake. Some liberal interpretation of the 
law may, at one time or another, have been transmitted to the 
ordinary of New Orleans. But we feel certain that any such 
document, if it exist, should not be characterized as an indult 
permitting the clergy of Louisiana to give Christian burial to 
freemasons, but merely as a practical application (interpretation) 
of the existing law. 

Among those who are ipso jure to be excluded from Christian 
burial are persons dying while under public excommunication. 
" Ignorare non debet parochus, qui ab ecclesiastica sepultura ipso 
jure sunt excludendi .... Negatur igitur ecclesiastica sepultura 
. . . . et publicis excommunicatis." Riluale. And this disposition 
of the Common Law is affirmed as the particular law of the entire 
United States by the Second Plenary Council, n. 389: "Sepul- 
tura ecclesiastica privantur excommunicati notorii et vitandi." 

We could wish the superfluous words et vilandi had been 


omitted. Vitandus must necessarily be notorie excommunicatus. As 
the sentence stands, a quibble may be raised as to whether the 
et does not call for a circumstance or condition not included 
in the notorious excommunication. The only satisfactory solution 
of the difficulty resulting from the presence of the words d 
vitandi, is found in the general interpretation of the paragraph by 
the prelates of the country. Christian burial has been uniformly 
refused to persons notoriously excommunicated, and dying with- 
out giving signs of repentance. Thus, in the Ninth Synod of 
Baltimore (1886) we read: " Quum Sancta Sedes saepius pro- 
scripserit secretas omnes societates, quocumque vocentur nomine, 
quae adversus Ecclesiam vel rempubiicam civilem aliquid moli- 
untur, et decreta Sanctae Sedis non ad solam massonicam sectam 
extendenda sint, sed et ad alias ejusdem generis, quae vel nomi- 
natim a Sancta Sede damnatse fuerunt, vel in quibus exigitur 
secretum absolutum et caeca obedientia ; monemus sacerdotes ut 
fideles hujusmodi sodalitiis secretis aggregates a sacramentis repellant, 
quamdiu iis adhserent, et sepulturam ecclesiasticam denegent iis 
qui usque ad mortem pertinaciter in iisdem perseverant. Quod 
si contigerit aliquem cum pcenitentiae signis ex hac vita migrasse, 
ritus sacros in ejus sepultura adhibendos permittimus, ea tamen 
conditione ut socii superstites funus non prosequantur propriis 
ornati insignibus." Statute 100, p. 78. 

[Proscripserit in the preceding is rather a mild way of putting 
it. The Holy See has not merely proscribed such societies, but 
laid the individual members thereof under excommunication. 
This excommunication (latae sententiae) is incurred by the very 
fact of joining, that is, becoming a member of the forbidden 
society : and it is only by reason of the excommunication, not 
the mere proscription, that members of such associations are 
denied Christian burial. In the Const, Apostelicce Sedis cap: ii. 
n. 4, we read : 

" Excommunicationi latas sententias Romano Pontifici reservatas 
subjacere declaramus : 

IV. Nomen dantes sectae massonicae aut carbonarias, aut aliis 
ejudem generis sectis, quae contra Ecclesiam vel legitimas 
potestates seu palam seu clandestine machinantur, necnon iisdem 
sectis favorem qualemcumque pragstantes, earumve occultos 
coryphaeos ac duces non denunciantes, donee denunciaverint." 
THE PASTOR, VOL. II., p. 133. 

And the Instruction of the Holy Office issued May loth, 1884, 


distinctly states that among the societies proscribed by the Holy 
See, some are merely proscribed, while others are condemned and 
their members excommunicated. The rules as regards Chiistian 
burial are not the same for the members of these societies. 
We quote a few words from the Instruction, given in full, VOL. 
II., p. 368, seq.\ " Ne quis vero errori locus fiat, cum dijudi- 
candum erit qucenam ex his perniciosis sectis censures, qua; vero 
prohibitions tantum, obnoxiae sint, cerium impiimis est, excom- 
municatione latae sententise mulctari massonicam aliasque ejus 
generis sectas, qtias, Cap. II., n. iv. Pontificiae Constitutionis 
Aposiolici.B Sedis designantur."] 

The statutes of the diocese of Newark go to even greater 
lengths than those of Baltimore. Number 123 reads : 

Catholic! societatibus secretis alligati non solum ad sacramenta admittendi 
non sunt, quamdiu ligamen cum iilis non solvunt, std etiam sepultura 
ecclesiastica denegari debet iis, qui usque ad mortem in istis societaiibus 
pertinaciter manseru' t. Quodsi aliquando contigerit aliquem moribundum 
societati renuntiasse et pacem Ecclesise impetrasse, ritus sacros in ejus 
sepultura adhiberi permit timus, ea tamen conditione, ut socii superstites 
propriis ornati insignibus funus non comitentur. Imo rectores ecclesiarum 
bene prje oculis habeant qu?e Cone. PI. B. III., n. 318. statuit de sepul- 
tura ecclesiastica in ccemeteiio alieno seu soeculari. Ad omnes praecavendos 
abusus statuimus prreterea Ecclesire honores iis habendos non esse Catholi- 
cis, qui impietate sua seu habituali, religionis Catliolicae neglectu. vel 
contumaci contra leges Ecclesise inobedientia, aut gravi quodam crimine, 
publice ac notorie Ecclesiam inhonorarunt, atque ante pnblicaui scandali 
reparationem morte decesserunt. Si forte infirmorum sacramenta receperint, 
vel eos confitendi desiderium habuisse prcesumi possit, pieces exequiales 
super corpus defuncti privatim recitare, atque mis?am pro anima defuncti 
privatim offerre, corpusque in coemeterio Catholico sepelire, licebit ; at vero 
ad ecclesiam corpus non afferatur. Vivus qui sacra limina fugit, non intret 

The man who persists in remaining a mason until his last 
illness, remains in ^contumacious disobedience to the laws of the 
Church. If he repents on his death bed, his body may be 
interred in consecrated ground, but not brought to the church 
for the funeral rites ; neither can the priest announce a mass 
for the repose of his soul. This Newark statute goes much 
further than the sacred canons. It is only a disciplinary law, 
however, and possibly called for by the circumstances of that 
particular diocese. It is to be interpreted as other positive 
laws. See Supra, p.' 298. . 

The Fourth Provincial Council of New York leaves it discre- 
tionary with the pastor to accord solemn funeral ceremonies, such 


as high mass, draping the church, etc., to one whose life was 
openly scandalous, AND whose repentance before death was doubtful. 
As exceptio unius est inclusio alterius, the Council does not 
seem to leave the accordance of solemn funeral rites discretionary 
with the pastor, when the man's repentance before death was 
a matter of moral certainty. But even where doubtful, the 
pastor is not free to refuse the low funeral mass and funeral 
rites : 

The following from the Council of New Orleans itself is very 
pertinent and seems to us utterly to do away with the notion 
of the indult in quesion : 

" Quum nefaria secretarum societatum lues per varias hujus 
provincise partes in animarum destiuctionem magis ac magis 
grassetur, censuerunt Patres expedire, ut renoventur decreta contra 
eju?modi societates ssepius lata, hortanturque vehementer omnes 
sacerdotes curam animarum habentes, ut ab istis societatibus 
fideles sibi commissos omni zelo atque prudentia deterreant 
Meminerint quoque sacerdotes neminem posse sacramentali abso- 
lutione, etiam in articulo mortis, donari, si ab eis recedere 
recuset. Prohibent insuper Patres, ne quis sacerdos sepulturas 
cujuslibet assistat, si membra alicujus societatis secretae, cum 
insignibus societatis externe apparentibus, sepulturse assistere 
tentaverint." Second Prov. Council of New Orleans, Decree VII. 

We might quote from every council and synod decrees to the 
same effect. Thus Cincinnati (1886): " Sepultura ecclesiastica 
iis est deneganda, qui scienter societati damnatae nomen dede- 
runt." And Brooklyn : 

" Declaramus neminem eorum qui jurejurando, aut alia 
simili quavis ratione, damnatse cuilibet societati se obstrinxerit, 
ad Ecclesiae sacramenta aut Christianam sepulturam esse admit- 
tendum, si vinculum illud abrumpere renuerit," 

The masonic society is notoriously condemned by the Church, 
its members excommunicated, and consequently to be refused 
Christian burial by the general law of the Church, as laid down 
in the Roman Ritual. 

Every mason is therefore under the ban of excommunication ; 
and, both by Common Law and our particular law, excluded 
from Christian burial. If John be notoriously a freemason, John 
is one of those denominated by the Second Plenary Council as 
notorii excommunicati. That an indult to bury persons dying under 
this ban was ever granted, we gravely doubt. 


A sound interpretation of the law, however, may be mistaken 
for an indult. 

Thus " Excommunicalus toleratus, dummodo sit notorie excommu- 
nicalus, sepultura ecclesiastica privatur." Konings, n. 1681. 

The inference is that excommunicatus toleratus, modo non sit 
nolcrie excommunicatus, sepultura ecclesiastica donari potest. 

All freemasons, whether known to be such or not, are under the 
ban of excommunication. But, strictly speaking, not every one who 
is a freemason is by that fact to be excluded from Chiistian 
burial. It may not be generally known that John is a freemason, 
and consequently it may not be generally known that John is 
excommunicated. The excommunication is not notorious. His 
connection with the fraternity may be known to several individ- 
uals, known even to the priest. This would not make his 
connection with the Order notorious, nor, consequently, could 
John's excommunication be said to be notorious. John, though 
dying under the ban, could get Christian burial. In this case 
John would get Christian burial, not in virtue of any indult, 
but because no law forbids ecclesiastical sepulture. May it not 
be possible that some decision or instruction in a case of this 
kind was misunderstood and accepted as an indult ? 

Again "Si poenitentiae signa dedit sepeliri in loco sacro 
potest." Konings, n. 1681. "Adest autem posnitentise signum, 
si moriens nomen Jesu invocavit, vel Dei misericordiam implo- 
ravit, vel pectus tutudit, vel confessarium petiit, etc., ad quod 
probandum unus testis sufficit." Konings, 1699. 

Hence, even though a man lived notoriously as a mason, 
notoriously excommunicated, and died without the priest, he 
could still get Christian burial, if, on the testimony of a credible 
friend or relative, he had shown signs of contrition before his 
last moments. The fact of Christian burial is equivalent to a 
declaration to the public that the man repented and recanted 
before his death. To a priest having such a case to deal with, 
we would commend the very prudent words of the Fourth 
Provincial Council of New York, ch. xiii., art. viii. : "Con- 
sulendus ordinarius cum id fieri poterit : secus autem in partes 
lenitatis et misericordiae propendeat judicium, ita tamen ut si, ob 
vitam publice scandalosam defuncti, dubiamque ejus pcenitentiam, 
id religioni profuturum judicetur, tali non concedantur ritus 
solemniores sepulturae Christianae." 

Splendid funeral services could hardly be accorded to one 


who, up to his last illness, stood forth before the world as a 
champion mason, and as such notoriously under the ban of 
excommunication. The faithful may be brought to understand 
why the motherly legislation of the Church permits the Christian 
burial. But, without scandalizing and offending them, the 
funeral of the wealthy mason could not derive any of its pomp 
or pageantry from the ecclesiastical functions. The law 'of the 
Province of New York is but the expression of common sense 
and common decency. 

In no case can the priest perform the funeral services over a 
corpse with the coffin displaying emblems of masonry, or with 
the masons present as a body wearing their regalia. A late Arch- 
bishop of Paris once did so, on hearing which Pope Pius IX. 
sharply wrote him: " Dissimulare non possumus, venerabilis frater, 
summam fuisse nostram molestiam admirationemque, ubi accepimus 
te exequiis interfuisse magni utriusque militiae magistri, Magnan ', 
et solemnem absolutionem fuisse impertitam, dum ex illius feretro 
massonica etiam exstabant insignia, et eidem funeri socii illius 
damnatcS sectae cum eisdem insignibus assistebant." 

With regard to the clause si absque. pcenitentice signis decesserint 
nee vo/um ullum recondliationis cum Ecdesia manifestavtrint, Father 
Sabetti, n. 973, aptly interprets it: " Sed ad hoc requiritur : 
i ut impoenitentia sit omnino certa ; 2 ut sit adeo publica 
(the impenitence) ut sepultura sine novo scandalo concedi non 

In conclusion we are forced to the belief that no indult in 
this matter contrary to the Common Law and contrary to the 
particular law of these States was granted to the Province of 
New Orleans or to any other, and we fancy that some authori- 
tative, correct, but benignant interpretation of the ecclesiastical law 
was mistaken for an indult. 

I5P The word sect used in official documents when referring to 
masonry, is to be understood in a restricted sense. THE PASTOR, 
II-, 173- 

NACHITOCHEN., Die 21 Junii, 1888. 

Rev. W. y. Wiseman : 

Dilecte Domine : Quod Illustrissimus ac Reverendmus Dubourg, quondam 

1 And Magnan died penitent, but had not renounced masonry when 
stricken with his last illness. 


episcopus Neo-Aurelianensis, indultum obtinuerit pro omni suse jurisdictionis 
loco et sine tempuris limite, ut sepulturam ecclesiasticam liceret concedere 
sociis societatum secretarum generaliter, servatis servandis et nullo aliunde 
obstante impedimento ecclesiastico, audivi ab lllmo ac Revmo Bianc, Archi- 
Episcopo Neo-Aurelianensi, anno 1857. 

Indultum in archivis non invenitur: sed quod datum fuerit vel non, minoris 
nobis videtur esse moment! cum recta interpretatio legis ecclesiasticae id 
ipsum indulgeat quod indultum inclusisse dicitur, et in locis olim jurisdic- 
tioni Illmi ac Revmi Dubourg subjacentibus, legibus F.cclesise in hac mate- 
ria consuetudo minima adversetur. 

Opinaris indultum non existere, bene vero aliquam legis benignam inter- 
pretationem sumptam fuisse pro indulto positive. Tua opinio mea est. 

Precor Deum ac suavissimam Matrem ut tibi operibusque tuis, ac specia- 
liter " PASTORI " faveant. 


Epiicopus Natchitochensis. 

"In exequiis defunctorum accurate et integre serventur casre- 
monias pro sepultura fidelium prasscriptse in Rituali Romano." 
Fourth Prcrv. Counc. of Ntw York. Per se that would be 
enough. But the fathers judged it well to emphasize the 
decree by condemning one abuse in particular, known to exist, 
not only in the province of New York, but elsewhere also. 
And so the decree continues : "Eis, ut quandoque fit, ex 
imitatione funerum acatholicorum nihil prorsus addatur. Severe 
proinde prohibtmus cantus in lingua vernacula quosvis, sive infra 
missam pro defunctis, sive infra ipsas casremonias funebres 
ecclesiasticas." Away with the "Angels ever bright and fair/' 
from the passionate heroine of the opera ! Even if the words 
were in Latin, the air and the scene are too commonly recog- 
nized to be appropriate. 

" Prsecipimus ut Catholici ante meridiem et in ecclesia tan- 
turn (matrimonio) jungantur, et in quantum fieri potest ante 
missse sacrificium. Quod si gravi de causa, haec regula servari 
non possit, mandamus ut omnia fiant privatim in ecclesia, praesen- 
tibus tantum pastore et duobus testibus." Synod of Detroit, 1886. 

It would be as odious as it would be ridiculous in some 
places for the priest to insist on preventing the immediate 
relatives of the groom or bride from witnessing the marriage. 


" Concio funebris in exequiis defunctorum, si quae habenda, 
semper sit brevis. Caveatur in ea a fallaci mortui laudatione, 
et vivorum potius sit exhortatio ; ut dum ' defunct! memorant 
virtutes, etiam et maxima eum adjuvent per orationes et obla- 
tiones, atque ipsi auditores, qua par est dispositione, se ptaeparent 
ad imminentem omnibus mortem ac tremendum judicium." 
Cone. Prov. Neo Ebor. IV. 

"Improbamus morem, inter nostrates vigentem, ornandi flori- 
bus funera adultorum, atque, ut a sacerdotibus prudenter et 
suaviter eliminetur in votis habemus." Ibid. 

Will it ever come to pass in the United States, that the 
sermon at the funeral mass of a bishop or a priest will be 
anything but a fulsome eulogy of the deceased ? And if one 
wishes to experience to the full the sickening effect of ' the 
odor of stale flowers and rotten herbage, he need only attend 
the next funeral of some ecclesiastic. Let us begin at home. 
Example teaches better than precept. 

"Let another praise thee, and not thy own mouth; a 
stranger, and not thy own lips. " Prov. xxvii. 2. 


All publications to be reviewed or noticed under the above heading should be sent, post or 
expressage paid, direct to the Editor, Rev. W. J. Wiseman, Cranford, N. J. 

the history of their suppression. By Fr. Francis Aidan Gasquet, O. S. B. 
Octavo, cloth, pp. 500 with map. Catholic Standard Library. John 
Hodges, London. Benziger Bros., New York. 

When Victor Hugo would write the story of Napoleon III.'s 
usurpation of power in France, whereby the Prince overthrew 
established order, which the country had ordained, and himself 
had sworn to support, the author's hand did not write tremu- 
lously, or in hesitation, as if its master stood abashed in presence 
of power, but in boldness, and with vigor, as became denunciation 
of a great wrong, and the bock received a truthful, if awful, 
title, "The History of a Crime." 

And the name rightly to be given to an account of the last 


royal Henry, of England's dealings with the things which be- 
longed to the Church of Rome, and, therefore, "to the peace" 
of the English people, never ought to have been that of "'Re- 
formation." To say the truth, the name should be a bold and 
open voicing of a most stern and wretched fact, calling that time 
of terror and martyrdom, just what it was, A REIGN OF LIES 

But " royalty " successfully accomplished its fell designs, and 
now, after the lapse of centuries, time and distance come in and 
seem to have the effect of softening the harshness of those deeds. 
The generation that shared the crimes and the guilt of Henry 
have passed to their graves; and their sons, who caught up the 
work from their hands to push it eagerly forward, have passed 
to .their graves; and their descendants, for generation after genera- 
tion, have passed to their graves. Though the evil that men do 
lives after them, Catholics have no quarrel with the dead; they 
have only sorrow for themselves and their misdeeds. Every page of 
F. Gasquet's book illustrates this. With majestic calmness he un- 
folds the story of Henry's barbarities, and the historian who can 
smother his indignation, and write coolly of those terrible events, 
is he whom we should seek, and on whom we may rely. Here- 
tofore, passion has been the motive of every "history" of them 
ever put out by the apologists for, or consenters to, the deeds 
of that degenerate successor to Edward the Confessor. It led 
them to misrepresentation, to falsehood, to the very destruction 
of history, results of which Anglicanism stands, and ever has stood 
in need, for the bolstering of it up. English Catholicism needs 
nothing of the kind, nor ever has needed. It fears the truth of 
history to-day no more than Blessed Thomas More, or Blessed 
John Fisher feared death, when they could have had life for 
merely temporizing with deceitfulness or double-meaning. 

So we are not surprised that the newest of the histories 
(holding rigidly this much abused word to its proper sense) of a 
phase of the DOWNFALL OF THE FAITH IN ENGLAND, written with 
utmost care, and strictest honesty, and with the discreet zeal of a 
born historian, the book whose title is given at the beginning 
of this article has passed, even in its first volume, to a third 
edition, and earned the approbation of critics so widely apart as 
the Westminster Review and the (London) Tablet, for it is a 
work which every student of Church history ought to have in his 
library, a delight never ceasing to the priest, who rejoices in the 


constancy of his brethren when times were trying them even unto 
the most terrible of deaths, and no less to the layman, who would 
become familiar with the true story of the times of that king 
with whom, Sir James Mackintosh said, " no real or legendary 
tyrant" ought to be subjected to a comparison. 

This work is all the more delightful for its straightforwardness 
and candor. Father Gasquet will not call it a history, but only 
an attempt to illustrate history, while it is, indeed, a most im- 
portant, accurate, painstaking, one may say. official, history, (so 
full is it of citations from original documents preserved in the 
record office and in the Episcopal register, and to which such 
full reference has not heretofore been made), of a time than 
which none has been more momentous in its proximate and 
remote effect upon royal dynasties, religion, people, and 
States, since Christian history began to be written. 

During many centuries, Henry VIII. ascended the throne 
early in the year 1509, the Religious Orders have rested, to 
English minds, and to the minds of that large body of the 
American people taught English history from an English point 
of view, under a dark cloud. Only thunders of denunciation 
against them for guilt and unnamable offences rattled in the 
skies. But now, at last, thanks to the devotion of Father 
Gasquet and his patient researches among official papers, the 
cloud is scattered ; and if prejudice be only laid aside long 
enough to let people read his history, in place of darkness and 
the long reverberating thunders, which were but lies bumping 
against each other, this generation, both in England and the 
United States, will enjoy the clear light of truth. 

No one need speak longer with bated breath of the monks and 
nuns of the sixteenth century, or think that devotion, even unto 
the scaffold* was rarely evidenced while Henry persecuted. In this 
volume of the learned and pious Benedictine, we are given., 
again and again, stories of life and death among the Franciscan 
Observants, and the Carthusians, which, as regards honor, purity 
of life, strength of character and will, exaltation of manhood 
and womanhood, all in face of the terrors of martyrdom, 
may fitly be placed beside those which are recorded in all 
histories, Protestant as well as Catholic, of the ages when holy 
men and women were oppressed by pagan force, and intrepidly 
laying down their lives for the truth, found life eternal in the 
Truth Eternal. 


It is interesting beyond any reading lately having come within 
our notice, to observe the thorough and conclusive manner of 
Father Gasquet in disposing of those fabulous papers known as 
the Comperta, which, with the letters purporting to have been 
written by the royal visitors, have supplied munitions of war to 
Fronde and other writers, whose self-imposed duty it has been 
to defend Henry's tyranny, and apologize for the acts of his 

Under the clear light cast by the original records, it is cer- 
tain that these Comperta were based only upon rumors, that 
they were circulated among the people by covetous hirelings, 
whose rapacity was to be fed by the destruction of the religious 
foundations and the dispersion of their religious. This was the 
necessary preamble to a distribution of their wealth to the en- 
richment of the king's favorites and creatures ; for the pretended 
"confessions" of wrong-doing monks and nuns disappear, the 
assumed self-accusations are proven not to have been made, 
inasmach as in the letters and Comperta there is internal, incon- 
testable evidence that the condemnations to confiscation and 
death were not laid upon any disclosures, however obtained, 
set out in the reports made officially to the ruling power. 

And thus the conclusion follows irresistibly, that Henry, hav- 
ing already resolved upon the casting off from himself and 
kingdom the moral restraints which, during centuries, had held 
within reasonable limits the kingly power and popular will, and 
which his father and sainted grandmother had revered as the 
very expressions of the will of God, used these false reports as 
pretexts, diplomatically hoping to blind the eyes of those who 
still were devoted to the See of Rome, and who still looked 
upon the religious houses as the true homes for the wretched 
and friendless in the realm. 

Father Gasquet presents, in strongest but most dispassionate 
way, the facts whence these consequences flow, and while he 
convinces and delights his readers, he achieves for himself a 
foremost place among men of English letters. 

We commend the work earnestly to our readers, while we 
await, in eager expectation, the appearance of its second volume. 
It should not only find a place in priests' libraries, but in the 
libraries of every intelligent Catholic layman. 

W. H. 



The Ordo for 1889. 

The Annual Edition of this carefully compiled Ordo is now ready. 
It contains, as heretofore, 





FOR -1889, 

which, like the combination Ordo is gotten up in handsome style, and 
will be found correct in every particular. 









eccripti-ve Circiilar 

oaa. -A.pplica.tiozs.- 

S D. N. j. c. 

Juxta Ordinem Breviarii Roman! cum cantu ex anthiphon.- 
arii Roman! Editions Authentica, 


I2mo. Bound in cloth .......................................... 6O Cents. 



for our dear Little Ones, by Miss Rosa Mulholland. With fifteen 
pictures, painted by L. Diefenbach and richly executed in Chromo- 
Xylography, by H. Knofler. Quarto. Bound, ............... $1.00 net. 


or Joseph of Egypt, a type of Christ. By Thomas F. Brennan. With 
thirteen beautiful Chromo-Xylographs. Quarto. Bound, ---- , $1.00 net. 


Figure de Jesus, Fils de Dieu. 13 splendides chrornotypies &c. Texte par 
1'Abbe J. A. Wittmann, Cure. Gracieux Album in 4. cartonne\ Net. $1.00. 


4 $ I , OO. 


"Opto magis sentire compunctionem quam scire ejus definitionem. " a Kempisv 


OCTOBER, 1888. 

No. 12. 


Priests in the United States have the favor of a privileged 
altar every Monday, provided they say mass in black when 
black is allowed. 

When black is allowed, that is, when black is allowed them 
by privilege, not merely when it is allowed by the general 

By privilege, they can say mass in black on Mondays, unless 
the day be a holyday of obligation, a feast of first or second 
class or a major double, a privileged vigil or feria, or a day 
within a privileged octave. 

Consequently, on all ordinary doubles falling on Monday we 
can say the low mass of Requiem. 

When, by the occurrence of one of the obstacles mentioned, 
the mass in black is forbidden on Monday, the privilege of 
Monday, both as to altar and permission to say the low mass 
for the dead on doubles, is transferred to the following Tuesday- 

If the low Requiem be likewise excluded Tuesday by an office 
that would exclude it Monday, the favor of the privileged altar 
can be gained by. the mass of Monday. (See Vol. IV. p. i seq.} 

From the Faculties granted our bishops: "Singulis feriis- 
secundis non impeditis officio IX lectionum, vel eis impeditis r 
die immediate sequenti, celebrandi missam de requie, in quo- 
cumque altari, etiam portatili, et liberandi animas secundum 
eorum intentionem a purgatorii po3nis per modum suffragii."" 
Faculty 20, Form I. All priests exercising the ministry in the 
United states have this faculty. The bishops are empowered to 
grant it and always do, even if not always explicitly. To sup- 
pose they do not would be absurd. 

"By the indulgence annexed to the privileged altar we are 
to understand, if we look only to the intention of the Church 

Copyright, Rev. W. J. WISEMAN, 1888. All rights reserved. 


and the use of the Poiver of the Keys, such a plenary indul- 
gence as will at once free the soul from purgatory; but if we 
consider it in the effect c\f its application, we are to understand 
an indulgence proportioned to the merciful will of God and His 
acceptance of the suffrage of the Church." Vol. IV. p. i. seq. 



Your decree [232") VOL. III., p. 154, makes it clear enough that a 
Requiem mass cannot be said or sung during the Forty Hours, and I take 
it to mean in the church proper. But how is it if there be a chapel in 
said church ? or if no chapel, and the body cannot be kept until after the 
Forty Hours, may it be brought to the church for the " absolutio ad 
feretrum," provided a veil be placed before the Blessed Sacrament. See 
De Herdt, VOL. III., n. 235. 

"J. S. 

The mass is certainly forbidden. The mass in a lateral chapel 
opening on the church is a Requiem in the church, and 
equally forbidden. Mass in a chapel annexed to the Church, 
ibut no part of it, is forbidden by no law. Now, as to Exequies 
during the Forty Hours, though there is no law forbidding 
them, we should argue that the "absolutio ad feretrum" in the 
church during the Forty Hours is forbidden equally with the 
mass. First, this absolution is a solemn office in nigris. With 
unwavering constancy, the Sacred Congregation forbids the use 
of black in presence of the Blessed Sacrament exposed. Low 
masses in black, even at side altars, are forbidden. 

" Durante expositione Sanctissimi in pyxide, an, permittente 
rubrica, possint in ecclesia, vel aliis capellis, celebrari missse de 
Requiem ? " 

Note that the question relates not to an exposition Sanctis- 
simo detecto, nor to an exposition ob publicam causam. In 
the exposition of the Forty Hours we have both. In the 
private exposition contemplated in the query, the rector of the 
church was at liberty to put away the Blessed Sacrament, or 
veil it, of his own will. In the public exposition of the Forty 
Hours he has no such liberty. Whatever be the answer to the 
above question, then, will apply a fortiori to the exposition of 
the Forty Hours. The answer is : 


"Missse de Requiem extra altare, ubi est expositum Sanctis- 
simum Sacramentum, poterunt celebrari, dummodo tamen oratio 
foram Sacramento non sit ex publica cama." (4181, 9.) 

And yet that low mass in black, at a side chapel, and far 
from the altar of the exposition, would seem to be a thing 
entirely apart from the exposition. So it is. But it is an 
office in nigris in the church of the exposition, and on that 
account forbidden. On similar grounds we should certainly 
contend that the "absolutio ad feretrum," with or without sing- 
ing, is forbidden while the devotion of the Forty Hours is 
going on in the church. 

Again, De Herdt himself writes (in. 235): " Diebus quibus 
missa exequialis praesente corpore vetita est laudabiliter ad ves- 
peram differuntur (exequiae) post expletum diei officium." But 
the " officium " of the Forty hours is not over "ad vesperam." 

But further we quote again from de Herdt: "Licet exequiae 
diebus Dominicis et festivis celebrari possint, sine piaejudicio 
tamen missae conventualis et parochialis, concionis et aliorum 
officiorum faciendae sunt. Haec enim, ut exequiae celebrentur, 
omittere, anticipare, aut differre non licet, quia sunt de praecepto, 
et hora secundum sacros canones et synodos praescripta cele- 
branda sunt: contra exequiae sunt magis pietatis officium, et in 
particularium bonum, quod publico communitatis bono postpo- 
nendum est." 

De Herdt continues: "Fieri nequeunt (exequiae) tempore ^ 
positionis SS. Sacramenti ob gravem et publicam causam, ut in 
oratione XL horarum; quo casu cadavera neque in ecclesiam in- 
ferenda sunt." 

Gardellini, in his commentary on the Instructio Clementina, . 
xvii., n. 8, argues from this point as an uncontroverted position. 

The concluding words of the paragraph Fieri nequeunt in De 
Herdt are somewhat confused and confusing. After stating posi- 
tively that there can be no exequiae during the Forty Hours, 
he adds: "Quando necessitas ea (cadavera) inferendi (in ec- 
clesiam) cogit, et SS. Sacramentum velari aut deponi non potest, 
officium funerale extra ecclesiam quidem solemniter fieri potest 
et debet, sed in ecclesia privatim, sine cantu, sine missa saltern 
cantata, et absque ulla solemnitate, et convenientur in aliqua 
capella laterali, si fieri possit." 

That in ecclesia privatim means merely that, as individuals and 
privately, the clergy may say the prayers. Were there to be any 


absolutio ad feretrum it could not be privatim. It would be a 
serious interruption of a public office, a matter that, all confess, 
is absolutely forbidden. The misleading words in ecchsia privatim 
are taken from the decree 4050. The circumstances were these: 
A nun was dead. The corpse was in the interior chapel of 
the convent. The exequiae would in such a case take place in 
the church, near the chapel grating. The question was : May 
or should the clergy perform the function that day? The 
answer was No, " et preces recitentur privatim:" that is, omit 
the exequiae, but the different members of the clergy, privately 
and apart, can say the exequial prayers for the deceased. Those 
words ' ' preces recitentur privatim " were erroneously supposed 
to be equivalent to Fiant exequies privatim. , Exequiae in a church 
cannot be held privatim. 

Finally the terms of the query in decree 5613 seem to us to 
admit of no doubt that the Sacred Congregation intended by 
its reply to forbid the exequiae during the Forty Hours. The 
proponent of the query says that, conformable to the teaching 
of Cavalieri, he had been forbidding them. But some criticised 
his ruling as wrong " qui dicunt praedictas exequias faciendas 
esse non obstante expositione Sanctissimi Sacramenti, eo quod 
S. R. C. nullum hac de re decretum emanasse inveniatur." To 
shield himself from this cavilling, the master of ceremonies had 
recourse to the Sacred Congregation, petitioning their Eminences 
to give him a rule to be followed in these cases " quando 
cadaver amandari nequeat inhumatum usque dum perficiatur 
praedicta Oratio XL horarum." It was our very case. The 
answer of the Sacred Congregation the rule is: " Let there be 
no mass : it can bt celebrated on the third, seventh, or thirtieth 
day, or on the anniversary. 

Surely, when the petitioner requested a rule for his guidance, 
"quando cadaver amandari nequit," if the absolution or exequiae 
in the church could be permitted, it would be so stated in the 
answer. The body is not to be brought to the church. The 
requiem, praesente corpore, and, a fortiori, its adjunct, the absolu- 
tion ad feretrum, are to be omitted. Let these take place on 
the third, seventh, or thirtieth day, when the Forty Hours' 
devotion will be over. 

We append that decree 5613 in full. 

Hodiernus magister caeremoniarum ecclesise metropolitanae 
Florentinae suppliciter Sacram Rituum Congregationem exoravit 


ut declarare dignetur quomodo se gerere debeant rectores eccle- 
siarum parochialium si tempore expositionis SSmi Sacramenti 
pro oratione XL horarum occurrat exequias esse faciendas super 
cadaver, quod amandari nequeat inhumatum usque dum perficiatur 
praedicta Oratio XL horarum. Caeremoniario supplicanti visum est 
sequi in omnibus methodum quam tradit Cavalieri, Tom. ii., 
p. 233, n. 8 ; sed cum haec sententia praedicti caeremoniarii 
nonnullis baud placeat, qui dicunt praedictas exequias facien- 
das esse, non obstante expositione SSmi Sacramenti, eo quod 
S. R. C. nullum hac de re decretum emanasse inveniatur ; 
idcirco ad eandem recursum habuit, ut hanc controversiam 
resolvere dignetur et certam dare normam pro casibus supra- 

Sacra vero Congregatio, audita relatione ab infrascripto secre- 
tario facta, re mature accurateque perpensa, rescribendum 
censuit : Juxta Instructionem Clementinam iis diebus abstinen- 
dum esse a celebrandis missis defunctorum, sive solemnibus 
sive lectis, ac missa solemnis pro defuncto cani poterit die 
tertio, septimo, trigesimo, ac anniversario a die obitus vel deposi- 
tionis defuncti. Die 19 Junii 1875. 


An in expositione et depositione SS. Sacramenti, etiam causa 
devotionis sit addendum Alleluia ad V. " Panem de coelo, etc." 

Resp.\ Negative. Die 5 Julii 1698. (3477.) 

An in expositione SS. Sacramenti per annum, occasione 
quadraginta horarum, vel alia quavis de causa sen necessitate, 
versiculis " Panem de ccelo, etc." sit addendum Alleluia. 

Resp.\ Affirmative, exceptis tamen Quadragesimae, Adventus et 
Vigiliarum temporibus. Die 23 Januarii 1700. 

It is a rule accepted by all rubricists that, where decrees are 
contradictory, the later is to be followed. If the two decrees just 
quoted were necessarily contradictory, it is most likely that the 
former would have been withdrawn from the last official edition 
edited with so much care by Mgr. Capalti. (THE PASTOR, vol. V.. 
p. 97. seq.) Gardellini, in his Commentary on the Clementine 
Instruction, writes of these two decrees: "Cur non idem utrique 
dubio responsum ? Ni fallor ea ratio est, quia cum versiculus 
"Panem de coelo" occasione expositionis dicendus, non pertineat 


ad officium, circa quod versantur rubricae, dum praescribunt 
Alleluia-, quum praeterea nondum lata esset certa regula, quae 
additionem illam laetitiae extra officium quibusdam tantum tem- 
poribus assignaret, ac proinde diversa esset ecclesiarum consuetudo, 
Sacra Congregatio juxta varias casuum circumstantias respondit 

Decreta ilia antiquiora sunt Instructione Clementina." 

In paragraph xxxi of the Instruction (THE PASTOR, vol. L, p. 
163.) the rule was definitely laid down. "Quodsi" concludes 
Gardellini " postquam hsec Instructio prodiit simile dubium 
delatum fuisset, non aliter certe, ac in ea praescriptum est, 
eadem S. Congregatio respondisset." 


On the subject of Dancing, we reproduce from a late issue 
of a foreign theological publication a brief answer to a corre- 
The Correspondent writes : 

"Sub Titulo, iii., Cap. iv., n. 4, De Eucharistia Patres Prov. Cone. 
Burdigalensis (Bordeaux, France) sic se exprimunt: ' Meminerint tamen ad 
hanc sacram Synaxim anhelantes, neminem posse duobus dominis servire, 
seque jampridem, in baptismate diabolo et pompis ejus et angelis ejus 
solemniter abrenuntiasse. Quapropter ad mensam Domini accedere non 
prsesumant ii omnes qui, libenter, occasione data, sive theatra, heu! fere 
semper obsccena, sive choreas saltationesque, imprimis recentiores quasdam 
manifeste damnandas, frequentare non dubitant, et quidem cum ornate 
gentilitatem sane plus quam Christianismum redolente, verborum Apostoli 
immemores : Non potestis mensce Domini patticipes esse, et mensce daemo- 
niorum. (I. Cor. x. 21]. 

The writer goes on to quote, from other councils recently 
held in France, decrees to the same effect and asks : 

i "Has a priest of the Bordeaux province, guided by these decrees, the 
right to announce from his pulpit that he will refuse absolution to those 
who will not give up frequenting those' dances that are held in taverns 
(cabarets') on Sundays, even during the afternoon services in the church, or 
in private houses, day and night, Sundays as well as week days ? 

2 c Even if, according to the letter of the Council, it be not only his 
right but his duty to make such a declaration to his parishioners, must 
he still make it, though he has reason to fear that it will have the effect 
of keeping the young women of his parish from the confessional, at least 
until they are preparing for marriage ? 

3 "How should the neighboring priests of a pastor who should make 
such a declaration act when penitents to whom he had refused absolution 
present themselves in their confessional?: ? 


4 "Or would it be better to make no public declaration, but, acting in- 
the confessional, allow none to communion but those who can declare 
that to them the dancing is no occasion of sin ? But these dances, always, 
dangerous, may they not be bad in themselves, and so, to let any who 
persist in dancing them to communion, would it not be opening the door 
to sacrileges innumerable? When this plan of action becomes known, Why! 
the dances will be found to be an occasion of sin to no one." 

R. The councils quoted by our correspondent place one thing 1 
beyond doubt, namely, that these dances, especially the kind 
now in fashion, are attended with danger, and consequently 
the grave obligation resting on all people to discard them. 
Hence the special duty of parents to keep their children from 
them and the duty of pastors and confessors to employ every 
means in their power, even to the refusal of the sacraments, to 
keep from sin the souls committed to their care. Thus far all 
are agreed. But now the question is, What course is it best to 
follow to attain the desired end ? To this question it is not 
easy to reply. The answer must be determined by such a 
variety of actual circumstances, it is next to impossible to lay 
down a general rule. Only the pastor and confessor can decide 
in each particular case. One thing is of the last importance 
however and must never be lost sight of, that the decisions in- 
each case shall be governed by the principles of moral theologv, 

To the first and second query we reply: To declare publicly 
that you will refuse all dancers absolution is certainly an im- 
proper way of proceeding. Besides the disrespect that would be 
thereby manifested for the sacrament of penance, such an an- 
nouncement would be likely to produce other evil results. 
Respect for the sacrament demands utter silence in regard to 
things that belong exclusively to the forum internum, and forbids 
us to do or say anything that would bring the sacrament into 
odium and tend to keep the faithful away from the sacred 
tribunal. But without going so far as to declare you will re- 
fuse absolution, can you denounce those dances from the pulpit 
and dwell upon the dangers to which those who frequent them 
expose themselves, and how culpable, and consequently how un- 
worthy of the sacraments, they render themselves by refusing to 
give up these dances? Yes, you can do all this, if you have 
good reason to believe thai by such public denunciation you can put 
an end to the dancing. But you can do nothing of the sort if 
you have no founded hope of thereby putting down the danc- 
ing but rather fear you will only alienate from the confessional 


those who, notwithstanding their dancing, still continue to ap- 
proach the sacraments. For, while you would gain nothing by 
the denunciation, you would needlessly lose your influence for 
good over those who were still in the habit of coming to con- 

To the third query: The rules that will govern the action of 
neighboring priests in dealing with penitents whom you refuse to 
absolve are the laws and principles of moral theology. They will 
absolve and must absolve those whom they find properly disposed. 
They will refuse absolution to those who have not the necessary 

To the fourth query: It may be a good thing or a bad, ac- 
cording to circumstances, publicly to denounce dancing as sinful. 
Generally it will be bad. Does it thence follow that you are to 
say or do nothing in regard to this matter? By no means. On 
the contrary, you should seize every occasion to decry it in private 
and especially in the confessional. You should impress upon 
parents whose children are exposed to danger, and upon those 
who indulge in such amusements, the great temptations that 
accompany this dancing and the numerous sins and misfortunes 
that follow in its train. 

You should particularly endeavor to have a few of the leading 
persons of the place renounce the dance. Their example will be 
followed and may end in putting a stop to such dancing en- 
tirely, or at. least in greatly diminishing the number of its 
votaries. L'Ami du Clerge. 


In a circular just received it is stated in bold type that in a 
certain number of cathedral churches in the United States, to wit : 

New York, Albany, Boston, Buffalo, Syracuse, Chicago, Charleston, 
Louisville, Allegheny, Burlington, Covington, Detroit, Harrisburgh, Lan- 
caster, Denver, Columbus, Milwaukee, Nashville, Si. Augustine, Natchez, 
Savannah, Tucson, Scranton, Schenactady, an oil is used in the 
sanctuary lamp which is confessedly not the oil prescribed. If so, 
it is certainly without the knowledge of the Rt. Rev. Prelates. 

" Lumen lampadis (coram Sanctissimo) oleo olivae nutriatur, 


nee alterius generis adhibendum est, nisi quibus locis ordinarius ob 
earn causam concesserit, quia nullum ejus generis haberi potest." 
Baruffaldi. (Ada S. S., I 40). 

"An graviter peccet qui negligit asservare lumen coram Sanc- 
tissimo Sacramento? Resp: Affirmative, si tern pus sit notabile: 
integra autem dies a pluribus auctoribus reputatur tempus nota- 
bile." Sabetti n. 693. 

" Lam pas non debet poni in parte laterali sed in medio ante 
altare." Sabetti. 




Qusesitum cum fuerit a S. Rituum The Sacred Congregation of Rites 

Congregatione : An occurrente anni- being asked : If the anniversary of a 

versario consecrationis episcopi ea ipsa bishop's consecration fall n the day 

die qua agi debet de anniversario of the anniversary of the election or 

electionis vel consecrationis Summi consecration of the Pope, should the 

Romani Pontificis oratio, Deus om- prayer, Deus omnium fidelium, be 

nium fidelium, sit bis dicemla, semel said twice, once for the Pope and 

pro Papa et semel pro episcopo ? again for the bishop ? 

Sacra Congregatio rescribendum cen- The Sacred Congregation replied : 

suit : In casu, de anniversario con- In that case the prayer for the 

secrationis episcopi agendum sequenti bishop is to be said on the day 

die. (5344) following. Dec. 20, 1864. 



Those using the Roman Ordo will say the proper office and 
mass of Pope St. Victor III., on the i6th of October, not 
de ea nor votiva. By a decree of July 23, 1887, the feast of 
Pope St. Victor III. was made a minor double for the Roman 
clergy, secular and regular, and also for all those outside of Rome 
who, by privilege or obligation, follow the Roman calendar. 
Why the feast of Pope St. Victor III. was not set down in 
this year's Ordo is, that the Ordo was not only written, but 
printed and copies delivered, in 1887, long before the July decree 
reached this country. The compiling of an Ordo is a tedious 


task. Hence, those on whom the preparation of it devolves 
begin early, and have their work generally finished in the July 
or August of the year previous to that for which the Ordo is 
prepared. Thus, this year's Ordo was ready for delivery before 
the decree of July 23, 1887, had existence. In like manner 
several of the Ordos for 1889 are already published. We have 
three before us. Naturally, in none of these is there any men- 
tion of the proper mass and office granted by the decree of 
August 5, 1888, for the feast of the Holy Rosary. That decree 
we gave in the August number of THE PASTOR, supra, p. 313. 
The decree regarding the office and mass of Pope St. Victor 
III. was given Supra, p. 57. 


Among those mentioned by the Ritual who cannot be 
accepted as sponsors are " infames, publice criminosi, et qui 
ignorant rudlmenta fidei." Can a child who does not know the 
Apostles 3 creed, or an adult, nominally a Catholic, but who 
does not even go to mass from one year's end to the other, 
who never knew or cannot now recite the creed, can these be 
admitted as sponsors in baptism ? 

No. But applicable to these cases also are the remarks made 
on p. 298 concerning freemasons. 

In most cases, when parents select children or those adults 
"qui ignorant rudimenta fidei " to be sponsors for their children, 
they do so only because they are unaware of the Church law. 
It might save much trouble to have this law among others 
clearly explained to the people in catechetical instructions. 

The child or adult, however, who cannot recite the creed from 
memory, may not be quite ignorant of the rudiments of faith. 


The second of the subjoined queries will particularly interest 
priests attached to churches dedicated to St. Michael, the arch- 
angel. The rubric, as in the Decreium Urbis et Orbis of July 
5, 1883, reads: " Adduntur commemorationes communes, seu 
suffragia sanctorum ut in Psalterio, si facienda sunt ; omissa 


commemoratione ejus de quo fit officium votivum." Hence a priest 
attached to a church dedicated to St. Michael is to omit the 
commemoration of his Titular, inter suffragia, when he recites the 
votive office of the Holy Angels in lieu of the ferial on Mondays. 

I. An in suffrages, quse fiunt in semiduplicibus, commemoratio 
Sancti Fundatoris alicujus Religionis, quse fit a regularibus, 
praecedere debeat commemorationem sancti Titularis in ecclesia? 

R. Negative. 

II. An in iisdem suffragiis, quse fiunt in officio votivo sanc- 
torum angelorum, commemoratio Sancti Michaelis Archangel! 
fieri debeat in iis locis ubi sanctus Archangelus est Titularis 
ecclesiae ? et quatenus affirmative, qusenam oratio est dicenda ? 

R. Negative. 

III. An infra octavam privilegiatam, l quae admittit festa duplicia 
primse et secundas classis tantum, recitari debeat nona lectio 
sancti cujus officium est simplex vel simplificatum ? 

R. Negative, si infra octavam privilegiatam 2 fiat officium de 
eadem octava vel de Dominica infra illam octavam. 

IV. An, cum festum patroni principalis civitatis vel dioeceseos 
pluries in anno celebretur, regulares teneantur ad singula officia 
vel ad unum tantum. 

R. Affirmative, ad primam partem ; Negative, ad secundam. 

V. An, ubi ecclesia dicata est Jesu et Marias, faciendum est 
duplex officium de sanctissimo Nomine Jesu et de Nomine 
Marias ? 

R. Affirmative. 

Die 14 Maji, 1887. 

As the same reason would seem to apply, it may be in- 
ferred that priests attached to churches dedicated to St. Gabriel, 
the Angel Guardian, and the like, should also omit the Com- 
memoration of their Titular in the votive mass and office of 
the Angels. 

1 The privileged octaves are five : namely, those of Easter, Pentecost, 
Epiphany, Corpus Christi, and Christmas. THE PASTOR, Vol. IV., p. 92. 

2 Privilegiatae octavse sunt illae, quarum fit commemoratio, licet occurrat 
festum duplex primse cl., et infra quas prohibentur missse votivse privatae 
et etiam privatse de Requiem." Gabriels, Qucestiones Mechlinienses, Q. 42. 
Only the privileged octaves of Corpus Christi and the Nativity admit feasts 
of first and second class. 



November is the month of the Holy Souls. To encourage 
a devotion that has already become quite general among the 
pious, his Holiness Leo XIII. grants an indulgence of seven 
years and seven quarantines, gainable once a day, and a plenary 
indulgence, on the usual conditions, to all who either publicly 
or privately perform some act of devotion every day during the 
month, for the repose of the faithful departed. 


quo universis christifidelibus concednntur Indulgeniice, mense Integra 

Novembri piis exerciliis animabus Purgatorii opem ef 

solamem laturis. 

Ex audientia Sanctissimi diei 17 Januarii 1888. 

Inter cetera Christianse pietatis officia illud etiam in permultis 
variarum dicecesium ecclesiis obtinuit mense integro Novembri 
juvandi quotidianis suffrages animas piacularibus pcenis excrucia- 
tas, immo et privatim a christifidelibus hujusmodi pium exercitium 
frequentari cceptum est. Quamvis autem singulis petentibus 
Indulgentiarum munera pro hoc pio exercitio Romani Pontifices 
concedere non renuerint, nondum tamen harum Indulgentiarum 
concessio universalis evaserat. Modo vero quum supplicationes 
porrectse fuerint Sanctissimo Domino Nostro Leoni Papae XIII., 
quatenus universis christifidelibus prasfatum pium exercitium 
peragentibus Indulgentiarum thesaurum reserare dignaretur, Idem 
Sanctissimus, hisce petitionibus clementer exceptis, quo ferventior 
erga defunctorum animas foveatur charitas, omnibus utriusque 
sexus christifidelibus, qui sive publice sive privatim peculiaribus 
piis exercitiis devotisque obsequiis animabus in Purgatorio 
detentis solamen per integrum mensem Novembrem quotidie 
afferre studuerint, Indulgentiam septem annorum totidemque quadra- 
genarum semel in singulis prasfati mensis diebus lucrandam, et 
iisdem pariter Phnariam Indulgentiam in una memorati mensis 
die uniuscujusque arbitrio eligenda, qua vere pcenitentes, confessi 
ac sacra communione refecti fuerint et aliquam ecclesiam vel 
publicum sacellum adiverint, ibique ad mentem Sanctitatis Suse 
pie oraverint, clementer est impertitus ; quas Indulgentias eadem 
Sanctitas sua defunctis quoque applicabiles benigne declaravit. 
Praesenti in perpetuum valituro absque ulla Brevis expeditione. 


Contrariis quibuscumque non obstantibus. 

Datum Romce ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiis 
Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae die 17 Januarii 1888. 

ALEXANDER, EP. OENSIS, Secretarius. 

By a Rescript dated May 4th, an indulgence of fifty days, 
applicable, too, to the souls in purgatory, was granted to all 
who, with a contrite heart, devoutly make the ejaculation My 
God and my all! Dens meus et omnia! The indulgence can 
be gained as often as the ejaculation is made. 


Reverendissime Pater : 

Per litteras a Conventu SS. Joannis et Pauli, datas die 25 Martii 
1879, et a paternitate tua Revma subsignatas, proposita fuerunt 
S. Congregationi Indicis, ut enodarentur, duo sequentia dubia : 

I. An scienier legentes ephemerides propugnantes hceresim incur rant 
excommunicationem articuli secundi Const. Apostol. Sedis, Summo 
Pontifici speciali modo reservatam ? 

II. An legentes sive libros proprie dictos cujusvis auctoris, sive 
fphemerides continentes hceresim incidant in censuram Indicis a s. m. 
Pii PapcB IX, ut supra, renavatam et cynfirmatam? 

Sacra Indicis Congregatio secundo dubio respondit Negative; 
ceu paternitati tuae alias jam significatum fuit. Et quoniam pri- 
mum dubium reputatum est competere supremae universali Inqui- 
sitioni, exhibitum eidem fuit, ut idem enucleare dignaretur. 

Sacra vero suprema Inquisitio die 21 currentis Aprilis proposito 
dubio respondit : Negative. Cum me de hoc certiorem redderet 
S. O. Assessor, onus mihi imposuit patefaciendi R. Vestrae resolu- 
tionem ejusmodi. 

Die 27 Aprilis, 1880. 

S. Cong. Indicis Secretarius. 


A queer practice has been introduced here and there of 
putting the black anti-pendium on the altar when the priest is 
forbidden by the rite of the office of the day to use black 
vestments, but is celebrating pro defunctis. It is not a little sur- 
prising that the Sacred Congregation should have been seriously 
asked to decide whether the practice is lawful. 


Beatissime Pater, N. N. ad pedes Sanctitatis vestrse humiliter 
provolutus, exponit quod in pluribus ecclesiis irrepsit usus, in 
missis privatis de ritu duplici, etiam primae classis, quando dici 
non potest. missa de Requie, altare velandi nigris paramentis, ut 
satisfiat pro fidelium desiderio eorumque devotioni erga animas 
Quaeritur utrum liceat ? Et utrum tolerari possit talis usus ? 

S. R. Congr. respondit : Non expedire. 

This "Non expedire" is equivalent to cannot or must not. 
(See THE PASTOR, Vol. IV, p. vi., in Index Rerum.) The answer 
is directed to the second query. The first needed no reply, the 
rubric of the missal is so explicit: " Paramenta altaris, cele- 
brantis et ministrorurn debent esse colons convenientis officio et 
missse diei/' The only question to be answered, then, was the 
practical one, whether the local circumstances would justify a 
toleration of the violation of the liturgical law. In the opinion 
of the Sacred Congregation, they would not : Non expedit usum 
tolerare. The practice must not be tolerated. 


A few months ago, we published, in VOL. V., p. 316, a Brief 
on Total Abstinence, addressed by His Holiness to Rt. Rev. John 
Ireland. In the following letter, addressed to the Rt. Rev. Bishop 
of Springfield, the Holy Father again gives proof of the great 
value he sets on these societies, as being an "opportunum 
planeque efficax remedium " for opposing the deadly vice of 
inebriety : 
Rme Domine : 

Amoris et devotionis pignus, quod omnes Catholici Perfect* 
Abstinentiae Socii in Fcederatis Americae Septentrionalis Statibus 
degentes, Summo Pontifici in Sacerdotalis ejus Jubilaei die exhi- 


bendum curaverant, Sanctitas Sua peculiar! solatio et jucunditate 
recepit. Magno enim desiderio flagrat ut perutitils vestra Soci- 
etas magis in dies per istas regiones propagetur. Perindeque ex 
vestris observantissimis litteris vos ad hunc finem consequendum 
omnem operam adhibere paratos esse laetus percepit. Deum 
itaque ferventer exorat ut vestris incoeptis propitius adsit, vosque 
suis coelestibus muneribus cumulare velit. Novum vero suae 
paternse dilectionis testimonium vobis praebere cupiens Apostoli- 
cam Benedictionem ex intimo corde depromptam singulis sociis 
peramanter impertit. Haec ad Te, Beatissimi Patris jussu, deferens r 
fausta cuncta ac felicia Tibi precor a Domino. 

Tui, Rme Domine, 

M. . Card. RAMPOLLA. 
Romae, die 25 Aprilis, 1888. 

Rmo domino D. P. T. O'Reily, Directori Spirituali Sodetatu 
Perfedce Abstinentice, in Foed. Amer. Sept. Statibus, Springfield, 

Drunkenness is a sin, but teetotalism is not a virtue. In se 
it is no more meritorious than it would be to confine oneself 
to mutton all the year, to the exclusion of beef, or to white 
bread, to the exclusion of brown. This is Catholic doctrine. 


****** Oct. i, 1888. 

REV. SIR: To aid in deciding a disputed question, will you state in 
THE PASTOR what are the indulgences granted for the recitation of the 
Angelus, and what the conditions for gaining them ? 


From Ihe Raccolta: "A PLENARY INDULGENCE, once a month, to 
all the faithful who, every day, at the sound of the bell, in the 
morning, or at noon, or in the evening at sunset, shall say de- 
voutly, on their knees, the Angelus Domini, with the Hail Mary 
three times, on any day when, being truly penitent, after con- 
fession and communion, they shall pray for peace and union 
among Christian princes, for the extirpation of heresy, and for the 
triumph of holy Mother Church. 

AN INDULGENCE OF ONE HUNDRED DAYS, on all the other days 
in the year, every time that, with at least contrite heart and devo- 


tion, they shall say these prayers. These indulgences are not sus- 
pended in the Holy Year." 

Those indulgences were granted in perpetuum by Benedict XIII., 
Sept. 14, 1724. 

By a rescript, dated Dec. 5, 1727, the same Pontiff granted that 
religious of both sexes, or others who live in community, if they 
cannot say the Angelus at the sound of the bell, owing to their 
being engaged at some exercise, according to their respective rules 
or constitutions, may gain these indulgences, provided that, on the 
conclusion of such exercise, they immediately say the above 
mentioned prayers. 

Benedict XIII. appointed that the prayers should be said, 
standing, on Saturday evening and on Sunday. (April 20, 1742). 
Benedict also ordered that, in lieu of the Angelus, the Regina Coeli 
with its versicle and prayer should be said (standing), during the 
Paschal season. By the Regina Coeli the indulgences of the 
Angelus may be gained. Those, however, who do not know the 
Regina by heart, can say the Angelus. 

It will be noticed that one of the conditions of the Angelus in- 
dulgences is that the prayer be said kneeling, and that it be said 
standing Saturday evenings and Sundays and also (the Regina) 
during Paschal time. Another condition required by Pope Bene- 
dict XIII. was that the prayer be recited at the ringing of the 
bell al suono ddla campana. These two conditions have since 
been withdrawn ; the latter by Pius VI., March 18, 1781, by a 
rescript of the Propaganda in favor of those who happen to be 
in places out of hearing of the Angelus bell. These can gain the 
indulgences by reciting the prayers morning, about noon, and 
evening. Both conditions were expressly withdrawn by His Holi- 
ness, Leo XIII., April 3, 1884, (THE PASTOR III. 13) and to those 
who do not know the Angelus or Regina Coeli by heart, the in- 
dulgences are made available, if they say five Hail Marys instead. 

In regard to indulgences it is well to remember that good 
faith does not supply for the omission of a condition required. 
" Animadvertere hie praestat, ad sacras indulgentias acquirendas, 
adimpleantur oportet opera injuncta, tarn quoad tempus et 
modum, quam quoad finem, etc., juxta tenorem in omnibus et 
per omnia cujuscumque concessionis, e. g., flexis genibus, vel 
stando, ad sonitum tintinabuli, statutis diebus et horis, etc. 
Quodsi aliquod ex operibus injuctis, vel omnino, vel in parte 
notabili, sive per inscitiam, negligentiam, impotentiam, vel 


quacumque alia causa non servetur aut prgetermittatur, indulgen- 
tiae minime acquiruntur. " The Sacred Cong, of Indulgences, 1835. 
(Apud Schneider, Die Ablasse, Theil n, Absch. i, n. 60,) 

When the third prayer is Ecdesia vel Pro Papa, and a 
priest duplicates, he can take one at one mass and another 
at the other. But though free to say the one prayer or the 
other at either or both his masses, he cannot say the prayer Ec- 
clesia and then the secreta corresponding to the prayer pro 
Papa Deus omnium. Each prayer has its own corresponding 
secreta and post-communion. 


"Tenentur sacerdotes, quum saeculares turn regulares, qui 
sacramenta alienis parochianis, sive consentiente proprio eorum 
pastore, sive urgente necessitate, administrarint, omnes oblationes 
quag jura stolse vocantur, proprio sacramenta petentium pastori 
in integrum remittere. Qui vero hoc ultra trigesimum quo 
acceptae sunt oblationes diem neglexerit, sciat se ipso facto esse 
suspensum.'' Seventh Synod of Detroit, 1886. 

When a priest is named to a parish he really acquires an 
exclusive right to the perquisites of that parish. They are a 
portion, of his lawful income. To withhold any part of them 
from him to whom they rightly belong is nothing less than a 
detentio rei alienae and carries with it a strict obligation to 

The abuse must have reached appalling proportions in Detroit. 
The amount withheld may be a mere nothing, twenty-five or 
fifty cents from a Canadian godfather. The retention of such 
an amount, or several times that amount, would not constitute 
a grievous sin against justice. In Detroit there must exist 
some cause wholly external to the sin of injustice, to justify the 
ipso facto suspension of the statutes. Very likely the statute 
received only that consideration from the clergy of the diocese 
which is implied in the following words, prefaced to the stat- 
utes of one of 'our Eastern diocesan synods: " Hisce statutis 
a secretario lectis, nullum oninino vel ambigendi vel disceptandi locum 
dari manifeste apparebat. Quocirca Reverendissimus D. D. Epis- 


copus, nulla interposita mora, alloquium gravitate, sapientia ac 
caritate vere paterna plenum habuit." The assembling of the 
diocesan clergy in synod is made to appear very much of a 
farce. Not all the fantastic tricks are played before high 
heaven in Detroit. 

"Stipendia missarum cantatarum seu solemnium praeter duo 
scutata, (2.00), celebranti reddenda, omnino pertinent ad rec- 
torem ecclesiae simul cum iis redditibus quae vulgo vocantur jura 
stoloe." Synodus Cincinnaten. , 1886. 

This statute of the archdiocese strikes us as very singular. 
To be plain, we cannot reconcile it with the teaching of theol- 
ogy or the prescriptions of the sacred canons. Coming from so 
exalted and conscientious an authority as the venerable arch- 
bishop Elder, made in synod, too, where His Grace had many 
of the ablest theologians and canonists in the country around 
him to advise with, we dare not say the statute is not con- 
sistent with theological principles and the decrees of the Roman 
Pontiffs. But the consistency is certainly not apparent to 
ordinary readers. On the face of it that statute seems to run 
counter to all we ever read or ever heard on the subject of 
the honorarium. 

The late Bishop Hendricken was long anxious to establish 
some such rule, at least in his cathedral. But he hesitated, 
seeing that there are so many and such emphatic decrees for- 
bidding any individual whomsoever but the celebrant, under 
whatever pretence, to make any gain out of monies offered for 

The bishop of Providence submitted the question to Cardinal 
Simeoni. He received the following in reply: 

Most illustrious and Reverend Sir : 

In a letter, dated March 16, your Lordship stated that the 
faithful of your diocese are sometimes wont to offer ten dollars 
or more to have a missa cantata for their deceased (relatives 
or friends). A part of the money is paid to the organist and 
choir. Now, a question has arisen as to whether the whole 
of the remainder should go to the celebrant of the Mass, or 
whether the pastor has a right thereto, paying the celebrant 
two or three dollars for his services. 

Before pronouncing my opinion, I took care to gather all 
needed information in regard to the custom prevailing in the 


United States in respect to this matter. From my enquiries I 
gathered the following points : 

Established custom in the United States forbids the making 
of any charge for the candles lighted on the altar or around 
the catafalque, if one be used. Of course, some money is paid 
to the organist and choir. Though the amount thus paid is 
different in different places, yet for each church it is a fixed 
sum. In some dioceses the cost of a missa cantata is deter- 
mined in diocesan synod. 

Further, I am informed, that on occasion of funerals in the 
United Statel no free offering is ever made that could come 
under the heading of jura siolce for the pastor's individual self. 
The offering is made only for the mass, which is a low mass 
or high, as the family of the deceased desire. 

In view of the custom and practice established in the United 
States, then, I would reply to your question as follows : 

The money which remains after paying the organist and 
choir, belongs to the priest who says the mass : and therefore 
the pastor can appropriate none of the money given by the 
faithful for having requiem masses celebrated. 


Strictly speaking, Cardinal Simeoni's letter is not official. It 
is not too much to say, however, that it is at least semi- 
official, nor, considering the careful enquiries made before it 
was written, that an official letter from the Holy Office or the 
Propaganda would co-incide with that of his Eminence. It is 
not likely that Cardinal Simeoni wrote such a letter without 
consulting his brethren in the Sacred College, and taking the 
opinions of the learned theologians and canonists that were 
always at his beck in Rome. While the letter, therefore, does 
not of itself constitute a binding law, it carries with it such a 
weight of authority that it must seem little short of rashness 
to disregard the Cardinal's solemnly expressed opinion. See 
THE PASTOR, Vol., I., pp. 43, 203 ; Vol. II., pp. 26, 378 ; 
Vol. V., pp. 54, 8 1, 86, 185, 212, and, for Latin text of Card. 
Simeoni's letter, p. 262. 

While we could give some reasons in justification of the 
Cincinnati statute, the principal one from the Constitution Rom- 
anos Pontifias of Leo XIII., (THE PASTOR, Vol. III., pp. 42, 
87), we must confess that any arguments that present them- 


selves to our mind are easily overturned by the unvarying 
discipline of the Church, and the positive and oft-repeated en- 
actments of the Holy See. See, for instance, that emphatic 
document of Urban VIII., Cum scepe contingat, Vol. V., pp. 
8 1 and 87. We are forced to doubt very seriously whether 
the statute Stipendia missarum harmonizes with the general law 
of the Church. 


( Communicated. ) 

The following questions have been recently asked by a correspondent in a 
Catholic newspaper. As they are of some practical importance, it may be 
useful, and it is certainly more appropriate, to discuss them in THE PASTOR. 
The questions are : 

! ****** j w i s h they, (the theological readers of the journal 
referred to), would inform me just how far and no farther Catholics may 
go with reference to assisting heretical churches ? 

2. Are Catholics eternally to keep on the lookout to see to it that no act 
or word of theirs may in any wise benefit Protestant churches ? 

3. Shall Catholics refuse to attend a musical or literary entertainment, 
excellent, moral, and praiseworthy in itself, because the proceeds of that 
entertainment are to benefit a Protestant society ? 

4. Should Catholics refuse to erect buildings near a Protestant church, for 
fear that thereby they might enhance the value of the Protestant church 
property ? 

5. Should Catholic workmen refuse to build Protestant churches, lest their 
labors might, directly or indirectly, benefit the Protestant congregations ? 

6. If you see a Protestant dying of starvation, are you to let him die, 
for fear that the food which caused his recovery, might, in some way or 
other, be the means of helping to perpetuate Protestantism? 

7. If Catholics refuse to in any wise help Protestant churches, why should 
they ask Protestants to help Catholic churches ? " 

Before proceeding to answer the foregoing queries, let me first state the 
principle on which their solution depends. The fundamental principle on 
which these and similar questions rest is one well known to theologians 
and is found in the treatise on Human Acts. The principle is this: It 
is lawful to be the cause from which two effects are foreseen to follow, one 
good, the other bad, provided 1 the cause be good or even indifferent in 
itself; 2 the reason of the action be proportionately grave ; and 3 the inten- 
tion of the agent be not unlawful. Thus a ruler may go to war in order 
to free his country from 'some crying injustice, although he foresees many 
innocent persons will be killed ; a storekeeper may sell firearms, though he 
knows some will abuse them ; a man may mortally wound an unjust 


aggressor, knowing death will follow, if there be no other means of saving 
his own life. Hence, we say, neither the common precept of charity, nor 
the special precept of any other virtue binds so universally that it is never 
lawful to do anything from which evil is foreseen to follow. For, if such 
were the case, all intercourse among men should stop, and Christ and the 
Apostles would not be justified in preaching the Gospel, since, doubtless, 
they foresaw some evils would follow from their action. Questions almost 
innumerable are solved by the principle laid down, many of which belong 
to the treatise on Charity, not a few to that part dealing with scandal and 
co-operation. Our correspondent's questions come immediately under this last 
head. Now it is necessary to bear in mind that co-opera 1 , ion is of two kinds, 
formal and material. The former concurs in the evil will of another, and 
participates in his bad act under the very aspect that it is bad. The latter 
concurs in the act as a something merely physical and indifferent, and abstracts 
altogether from the malice of the principal agent. Formal co-operation is never 
lawful. Material co-operation may or may not be lawful, in accordance with, 
the circumstances of the case under consideration. So much for principles ; 
now for their application. I take the questions in the Border stated above. 


Formal co-operation in promoting heresy is not allowed. This goes with- 
out saying, and is nothing more than the application of 'the principle stated, 
to the sin of heresy. Nor are Catholics allowed to sanction indifferentism 
in matters of religious worship. Serious scandal, either to Catholics or to 
non-Catholics, is also a sufficient reason, where such exists, why the former 
should not assist heretical churches. Again, if assistance were demanded in 
hatred or contempt of religion, such assistance on the part of Catholics could 
not be justified. Thus far, I have stated how far a Catholic may not go- 
in certain well-defined cases in assisting heretical churches. To the other 
part of the query, how far he may assist, a categorical answer is simply im- 
possible. Each case, as it comes up, can of course be decided, but the only 
answer which will cover all cases is the principle stated above, and the 
reason why the answer, yes, or no, cannot be given, is because circumstances 
alter cases. The morality of an act is derived from the circumstances as well 
as from the object and from the intention of the agent. A thing may be 
lawful in one country, and yet be sinful in another. A man may charge 
twelve or fiften per cent for the use of his money in certain parts of 
America, whereas, if he were to do the same in England, ordinarily, he 
would be guilty of the sin of usury. The circumstance which changes this 
case is that the use of money is worth more in America than in England. 
So also there are circumstances in this country which justify Catholics in 
assisting, at least indirectly, heretical churches. Protestantism is in peaceful 
possession and is not in a state of formal opposition. Here no scandal 
arises from such assistance, nor is it asked in contempt of Catholicity, nor 
does it sanction indifferentism in religious matters, nor is it an acknowledg- 
ment that Protestants are in a fold of safety or journeying by a via salulis, 
nor is it an approbation of heresy. The assistance is given, not to promote 
a fnlse reliqion, but to show the good feeling which exists between Catholics 
and their Protestant neighbors. And let [me insist on this, for it is pivotal 


of the whole series of questions. Social relations constitute the motive of 
the Catholic's action. 


Catholics are not bound to see that no act or word of theirs may in 
any wise benefit Protestant churches. Why should they ? If such were the 
case, taken in all its wide range covered by the second query, it would be 
an intolerable burden. This is clear, if we consider the many ways Protestant 
churches may be assisted indirectly and remotely. St. Augustine somewhere 
facetiously remarks, if the ox of a Christian should gore some one, or his 
horse kick a man to death, a Christian is not, therefore, bound to have an ox 
without horns, or a horse without hoofs. You may as well say that Catholics 
are bound to have none but hornless oxen, and hoofless horses, and toothless 
dogs, through fear of injuring their neighbors, as to say that such an obli- 
gation exists as this question asks about. 


There is no obligation on Catholics to refuse to attend a musical or a 
literary entertainment, because the proceeds are to benefit a Protestant 
Society. Catholics go there, not to promote error, but for social reasons. 
Thus, also, they attend the marriage or the funeral of heretics, for the 
sake of urbanity, (Causa civilis honoris}. Such are merely social acts 
(actus civiles,} of people living in friendly relationship with each other. 
There is no use in saying this or that is prohibited in such or such a 
country ; I am writing simply of the case in the peculiarly favorable 
circumstances which exist here, and apart from prohibition by the proper 


The fourth question is a little ridiculous. Catholics may build as near 
as they please to a Protestant church ; and if they increase the value of 
the church property they need have no uneasiness of soul. By order of 
the ordinary of the diocese, I am building a Catholic church in close 
proximity to a Protestant one, and I am sure neither he 'nor I have any 
qualms of conscience, because my church enhances the value of the property 
of the Episcopal church hard by. 


Catholic workmen need not refuse to build Protestant churches, lest their 
labor should benefit Protestant congregations. If their labor were demanded 
by way of contempt of Catholicity, then they should refuse. But such a 
thing is unheard of in America. Scandal is also a preventing cause. There 
are, however, few countries where scandal could arise from such work ; 
certainly not in America. The case of Catholic architects is a little more 
difficult, because their co-operation is a little more proximate. But even for 
them, in this country, I have no difficulty in saying it is not unlawful to 
work on Protestant churches. 

It would be most outrageous teaching to say that a Catholic should allow 


a starving Protestant to die, lest his recovery might possibly be a means 
of perpetuating Protestantism. Such is not our teaching. Ours is rather 
that of St. Francis, who says : " A tender love of our neighbor is one of 
the greatest and most excellent gifts that the Divine Goodness bestows upon 
men." " Eat thy bread with the hungry and the needy," writes Tobias 
" and with thy garments cover the naked." The teaching of our Church 
on this point is summed up in the words of the Sermon on the Mount : 
" Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." 


It may not appear to be a very graceful thing to ask Protestants to help 
Catholic churches, if Catholics refuse to help in any wise Protestant 
churches. But suppose they did so refuse, yet there is a reason why 
Protestants might be asked to assist. The reason is to be found in their 
belief. They hold, you can be saved, and perhaps as easily, in one church 
as in another. We say, you must belong to the one true Church